Improving Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Making Processes

Introduction: Although shared decision making is recommended for cancer screening, it is not routinely completed in practice because of time constraints. We evaluated a process for improving decision making about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using mailed decision aids (DA) with follow-up telephone support in primary care practices. Methods: We identified patients aged 50-75 who were not up to date with CRC screening in three primary care practices. DA were distributed via mail with telephone follow-up to eligible patients, and charts were reviewed six months later for CRC screening completion. Results: Among 1,064 eligible patients who received the mailed DA, 513 (48.2%) were reached by phone. During the six months after the intervention, 148/1064 (13.9%) patients were screened for CRC (4.8% underwent FIT, 9.1% underwent colonoscopy). Younger patients (aged 50-54) had higher rates of any screening (32.4%) compared with all other age groups (range 12.8%-19.6%), p=0.026, while Medicaid patients had the lowest rates of screening (4.0%), and insured patients had the highest rates (45.3%), p=0.003. Overall, 113/513 (22.0%) who were reached by phone went on to complete screening within 6 months, compared with 35/551 (6.4%) of patients who were not reached by phone (p Conclusion: A standard process for identifying patients unscreened for CRC and DA distribution via mail with telephone decision support modestly increased CRC screening and is consistent with the goal of providing preference-sensitive care and informed decision making. Improving care processes to include decision support outside of office visits is possible in primary care practices

Development of a Certificate in Healthcare Improvement for Inter-Professional Teams

Introduction To address gaps in care team improvement-science education and connect geographically dispersed learners, we created a healthcare improvement certificate program, now completing the third program year, for inter-professional (IP) healthcare teams, including third year medical students. Methods This hybrid learning program consists of five modules: Learning Healthcare Systems, Improvement Science, Patient Safety and Diagnostic Error, Population Health and Health Equity and Leading Change. The curricular materials are comprised of focused readings, concise videos, faculty-moderated discussion boards, weekly synchronous calls of participants with faculty, and a longitudinal improvement project. The faculty are content experts, and worked with a curricular designer to define learning objectives and develop content. Results We have completed three years of this six-month program, training 61 participants (17 of whom were medical students) at 14 sites. In the third year, several medical students participated without an IP team. Development of the materials has been iterative, with feedback from learners and faculty used to shape the materials. Discussion We demonstrate the development and rollout of a hybrid-learning program for diverse and geographically dispersed IP teams, including medical students. Time restrictions limited the depth of topics, and scheduling overlap caused some participants to miss the interactive calls. We plan to evaluate the utility of the program for participants over time, using qualitative methods. Conclusion This educational model is feasible for IP teams studying improvement science and implementing change projects, and can be adopted to dispersed geographic settings

Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates amongst female Cambodian, Somali, and Vietnamese immigrants in the USA

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Minority women, particularly immigrants, have lower cancer screening rates than Caucasian women, but little else is known about cancer screening among immigrant women. Our objective was to assess breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates among immigrant women from Cambodia, Somalia, and Vietnam and explore screening barriers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We measured screening rates by systematic chart review (N = 100) and qualitatively explored screening barriers via face-to-face questionnaire (N = 15) of women aged 50–75 from Cambodia, Somalia, and Vietnam attending a general medicine clinic (Portland, Maine, USA).</p> <p>Results</p> <p><it>Chart Review </it>– Somali women were at higher risk of being unscreened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer compared with Cambodian and Vietnamese women. A longer period of US residency was associated with being screened for colorectal cancer. We observed a 7% (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01–1.13, p = 0.01) increase in the odds that a woman would undergo a fecal occult blood test for each additional year in the US, and a 39% increase in the odds of a woman being screened by colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy for every five years of additional US residence (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.21–1.61, p = 0.02). We did not observe statistically significant relationships between odds of being screened by mammography, clinical breast exam or papanicolaou test according to years in the US. <it>Questionnaire </it>– We identified several barriers to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening, including discomfort with exams conducted by male physicians.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Somali women were less likely to be screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer than Cambodian and Vietnamese women in this population, and uptake of colorectal cancer screening is associated with years of residency in this country. Future efforts to improve equity in cancer screening among immigrants may require both provider and community education.</p

The Vehicle, Fall 1987

Table of Contents Sketches in the SunRodger L. Patiencepage 3 Reflecting PoolRob Montgomerypage 5 Grandpa\u27s Porcelain DollRichard E. Hallpage 6 Tintype 1837Catherine Friemannpage 6 PhotographSteven M. Beamerpage 7 Washerwoman\u27s SongBob Zordanipage 8 Scrambled Eggs for D.O.Lynne A. Rafoolpage 8 my mother would sayMonica Grothpage 9 Retired by His ChildrenDan Von Holtenpage 10 I am the oldestMonica Grothpage 11 Ice on WheatRob Montgomerypage 12 The Nature of the RoseTroy Mayfieldpage 12 Past NebraskaDan Hornbostelpage 13 Five Minute Jamaican VacationChristy Dunphypage 14 PhotographSteven M. Beamerpage 14 The Angry PoemChristy Dunphypage 15 Road UnfamiliarChristy Dunphypage 15 raised voicesMonica Grothpage 16 Old Ladies & MiniskirtsKara Shannonpage 17 FreakspeakBob Zordanipage 18 PortraitDan Von Holtenpage 18 Mobile VacuumKathleen L. Fairfieldpage 19 Rev. Fermus DickSteve Hagemannpage 20 PhotographSteven M. Beamerpage 21 What\u27s the Name of That Flower?Richard Jesse Davispage 22 RequestChristy Dunphypage 23 SketchPaul Seabaughpage 24 ExperiencedMarilyn Wilsonpage 26 Leaving: Two ViewsTina Phillipspage 27 AntaeusDan Von Holtenpage 28 Misogyny at 19J. D. Finfrockpage 29 A Mental CrippleSteve Hagemannpage 32 AssociationsRhonda Ealypage 33 Banana BreadGail Bowerpage 34 Bill and JackBradford B. Autenpage 35 After Image No. 2Rob Montgomerypage 35 VrrooomBeth Goodmanpage 36 Mr. Modern LoverMolly Maddenpage 36 TravelogueRodger L. Patiencepage 37 Down the HighwayJoan Sebastianpage 38 A Retread HeavenRob Montgomerypage 41 StuporDan Von Holtenpage 42 Love Poem After a Seizure in Your BedBob Zordanipage 43 PalsyChristy Dunphypage 44 Interview with Mr. MatthewsBob Zordanipage 45 Chasing Down Hot Air Balloons on a Sunday MorningRob Montgomerypage 48https://thekeep.eiu.edu/vehicle/1049/thumbnail.jp

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are rising globally and there is concern that increased migration is contributing to the burden of antibiotic resistance in Europe. However, the effect of migration on the burden of AMR in Europe has not yet been comprehensively examined. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data for AMR carriage or infection in migrants to Europe to examine differences in patterns of AMR across migrant groups and in different settings. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus with no language restrictions from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 18, 2017, for primary data from observational studies reporting antibacterial resistance in common bacterial pathogens among migrants to 21 European Union-15 and European Economic Area countries. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to report data on carriage or infection with laboratory-confirmed antibiotic-resistant organisms in migrant populations. We extracted data from eligible studies and assessed quality using piloted, standardised forms. We did not examine drug resistance in tuberculosis and excluded articles solely reporting on this parameter. We also excluded articles in which migrant status was determined by ethnicity, country of birth of participants' parents, or was not defined, and articles in which data were not disaggregated by migrant status. Outcomes were carriage of or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. We used random-effects models to calculate the pooled prevalence of each outcome. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043681. FINDINGS: We identified 2274 articles, of which 23 observational studies reporting on antibiotic resistance in 2319 migrants were included. The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or AMR infection in migrants was 25·4% (95% CI 19·1-31·8; I2 =98%), including meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (7·8%, 4·8-10·7; I2 =92%) and antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (27·2%, 17·6-36·8; I2 =94%). The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or infection was higher in refugees and asylum seekers (33·0%, 18·3-47·6; I2 =98%) than in other migrant groups (6·6%, 1·8-11·3; I2 =92%). The pooled prevalence of antibiotic-resistant organisms was slightly higher in high-migrant community settings (33·1%, 11·1-55·1; I2 =96%) than in migrants in hospitals (24·3%, 16·1-32·6; I2 =98%). We did not find evidence of high rates of transmission of AMR from migrant to host populations. INTERPRETATION: Migrants are exposed to conditions favouring the emergence of drug resistance during transit and in host countries in Europe. Increased antibiotic resistance among refugees and asylum seekers and in high-migrant community settings (such as refugee camps and detention facilities) highlights the need for improved living conditions, access to health care, and initiatives to facilitate detection of and appropriate high-quality treatment for antibiotic-resistant infections during transit and in host countries. Protocols for the prevention and control of infection and for antibiotic surveillance need to be integrated in all aspects of health care, which should be accessible for all migrant groups, and should target determinants of AMR before, during, and after migration. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, the Wellcome Trust, and UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare-associated Infections and Antimictobial Resistance at Imperial College London

Surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a prospective, international, multicentre cohort study

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common infections associated with health care, but its importance as a global health priority is not fully understood. We quantified the burden of SSI after gastrointestinal surgery in countries in all parts of the world. Methods: This international, prospective, multicentre cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection within 2-week time periods at any health-care facility in any country. Countries with participating centres were stratified into high-income, middle-income, and low-income groups according to the UN's Human Development Index (HDI). Data variables from the GlobalSurg 1 study and other studies that have been found to affect the likelihood of SSI were entered into risk adjustment models. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day SSI incidence (defined by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for superficial and deep incisional SSI). Relationships with explanatory variables were examined using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02662231. Findings: Between Jan 4, 2016, and July 31, 2016, 13 265 records were submitted for analysis. 12 539 patients from 343 hospitals in 66 countries were included. 7339 (58·5%) patient were from high-HDI countries (193 hospitals in 30 countries), 3918 (31·2%) patients were from middle-HDI countries (82 hospitals in 18 countries), and 1282 (10·2%) patients were from low-HDI countries (68 hospitals in 18 countries). In total, 1538 (12·3%) patients had SSI within 30 days of surgery. The incidence of SSI varied between countries with high (691 [9·4%] of 7339 patients), middle (549 [14·0%] of 3918 patients), and low (298 [23·2%] of 1282) HDI (p < 0·001). The highest SSI incidence in each HDI group was after dirty surgery (102 [17·8%] of 574 patients in high-HDI countries; 74 [31·4%] of 236 patients in middle-HDI countries; 72 [39·8%] of 181 patients in low-HDI countries). Following risk factor adjustment, patients in low-HDI countries were at greatest risk of SSI (adjusted odds ratio 1·60, 95% credible interval 1·05–2·37; p=0·030). 132 (21·6%) of 610 patients with an SSI and a microbiology culture result had an infection that was resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic used. Resistant infections were detected in 49 (16·6%) of 295 patients in high-HDI countries, in 37 (19·8%) of 187 patients in middle-HDI countries, and in 46 (35·9%) of 128 patients in low-HDI countries (p < 0·001). Interpretation: Countries with a low HDI carry a disproportionately greater burden of SSI than countries with a middle or high HDI and might have higher rates of antibiotic resistance. In view of WHO recommendations on SSI prevention that highlight the absence of high-quality interventional research, urgent, pragmatic, randomised trials based in LMICs are needed to assess measures aiming to reduce this preventable complication

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people who inject drugs accessing harm reduction services in an rural American state

BACKGROUND: The impact of public health policies during the COVID-19 pandemic on people who inject drugs (PWID) has varied across regions. In other countries, recent research has shown that PWID access to harm reduction services, despite rapid adaptations, has been negatively impacted. Our study describes these impacts in a rural state. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with PWID, community partners, and healthcare providers in the rural state of Maine (USA). We explored how changes made during the pandemic impacted access to harm reduction services, including basic services (i.e., shelter), syringe service programs, safe drug supply, low barrier treatment, and peer support. Interviews were analyzed using the framework method to apply Penchansky\u27s model of access, with Saurman\u27s modification, which includes six dimensions of access-accessibility, availability, acceptability, affordability, accommodation, awareness. RESULTS: We interviewed thirty-six stakeholders (N = 9 community partners, N = 9 healthcare providers, N = 18 PWID). Policies such as mobile outreach expansion, mail delivery of equipment, and relaxed telemedicine regulations facilitated accessibility to syringe service programs and low barrier buprenorphine treatment. Public health policies, such as social distancing and screening policies, reduced contact, which subsequently reduced acceptability and awareness of many services. Elimination of the one-for-one needle exchange in some areas increased, acceptability (i.e., perception of service), and affordability for PWID. However, some areas actually began enforcing a one-for-one needle exchange policy, which reduced affordability, acceptability, and awareness of services. CONCLUSIONS: Changes resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted all dimensions of access to harm reduction services among PWID. While some barriers to harm reduction services were unavoidable during the pandemic, we found that specific policy decisions mitigated service barriers, while other policies exacerbated them. Relaxing needle exchange policies were particularly helpful in facilitating access to harm reduction services by giving community organizations flexibility to adapt to the evolving needs of PWID. These results can inform policies and service delivery to optimally mitigate the negative impacts on PWID during, and beyond, the pandemic

Decisions about adopting novel COVID‐19 vaccines among White adults in a rural state, USA: A qualitative study

Abstract Purpose Many people, especially in rural areas of the United States, choose not to receive novel COVID‐19 vaccinations despite public health recommendations. Understanding how people describe decisions to get vaccinated or not may help to address hesitancy. Methods We conducted semistructured interviews with 17 rural inhabitants of Maine, a sparsely populated state in the northeastern US, about COVID‐19 vaccine decisions during the early rollout (March–May 2021). We used the framework method to compare responses, including between vaccine Adopters and Non‐adopters. Findings Adopters framed COVID‐19 as unequivocally dangerous, if not personally, then to other people. Describing their COVID concerns, Adopters emphasized disease morbidities. By contrast, Non‐adopters never mentioned morbidities, referencing instead mortality risk, which they perceived as minimal. Instead of risks associated with the disease, Non‐adopters emphasized risks associated with vaccination. Uncertainty about the vaccine development process, augmented by social media, bolstered concerns about the long‐term unknown risks of vaccines. Vaccine Adopters ultimately described trusting the process, while Non‐adopters expressed distrust. Conclusion Many respondents framed their COVID vaccination decision by comparing the risks between the disease and the vaccine. Associating morbidity risks with COVID‐19 diminishes the relevance of vaccine risks, whereas focusing on low perceived mortality risks heightens their relevance. Results could inform efforts to address COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy in the rural US and elsewhere. Patient or Public Contribution Members of Maine rural communities were involved throughout the study. Leaders of community health groups provided feedback on the study design, were actively involved in recruitment, and reviewed findings after analysis. All data produced and used in this study were co‐constructed through the participation of community members with lived experience