The Association of English Functional Health Literacy and the Receipt of Mammography among Hispanic Women Compared to Non-Hispanic U.S.-Born White Women

Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer death among Hispanic women in the U.S., and mammography is the recommended screening for early diagnosing and preventing breast cancer. Several barriers exist to influence mammography utilization including poor health literacy. However, it is unclear whether the effect of health literacy on mammography utilization is consistent between Hispanic women and non-Hispanic White women. The main objective of this study was to examine association between functional health literacy and the receipt of mammography among Hispanic women compared to non-Hispanic White women in the U.S.A cross-sectional design using participants engaged in the National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Study sample comprised of 4,249 Hispanic and non-Hispanic U.S.-born White women ≥ 40 years of age who completed the functional health literacy assessment. Regression analyses were performed to test the association between health literacy and receipt of mammography. Among Hispanic women, analyses considered the influence of language-preference acculturation.Equal percentages of Hispanic (59.3%) and non-Hispanic White (60.6%) women received mammography. After adjusting for covariates, health literacy was positively associated with receiving mammography among U.S.-born White women (β = 0.14, p<0.001), but negatively associated with mammography among Hispanic women (β = -0.13, p<0.001). Analyses stratified by acculturation status revealed that higher health literacy was associated with lower mammography among language-preference acculturated Hispanic women (β = -0.48, p<0.001), yet an opposite result among less acculturated Hispanic women (β = 0.08, p<0.001).Functional health literacy has different associations with mammography depending upon ethnicity. Language-preference acculturation may explain the differing association

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group