Patient navigator reported patient barriers and delivered activities in two large federally-funded cancer screening programs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Barrington WE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7055651 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine how closely a published model of navigation reflects the practice of navigation in breast cancer patient navigation programs.Data sourceObservational field notes describing patient navigator activities collected from 10 purposefully sampled, foundation-funded breast cancer navigation programs in 2008-2009.Study designAn exploratory study evaluated a model framework for patient navigation published by Harold Freeman by using an a priori coding scheme based on model domains.Data collectionField notes were compiled and coded. Inductive codes were added during analysis to characterize activities not included in the original model.Principal findingsPrograms were consistent with individual-level principles representing tasks focused on individual patients. There was variation with respect to program-level principles that related to program organization and structure. Program characteristics such as the use of volunteer or clinical navigators were identified as contributors to patterns of model concordance.ConclusionsThis research provides a framework for defining the navigator role as focused on eliminating barriers through the provision of individual-level interventions. The diversity observed at the program level in these programs was a reflection of implementation according to target population. Further guidance may be required to assist patient navigation programs to define and tailor goals and measurement to community needs.
| S-EPMC4213049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We investigated reasons for non-treatment of osteoporosis and discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy. Barriers to treatment include patients' preference for alternative treatments and a fear of possible side effects. Side effects are a common reason for treatment discontinuation, and they may be associated with a lack of willingness to restart treatment.Osteoporosis patients commonly cite treatment-related side effects, or the fear thereof, as a reason for discontinuing or not initiating anti-osteoporosis medications. The purpose of this study was to investigate, from the patient's perspective, reasons for (i) non-treatment of osteoporosis and (ii) discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy.This was an internet-based survey of postmenopausal women in the USA who self-reported having been diagnosed with osteoporosis. Respondents were recruited from consumer research panels and received nominal compensation.Within the surveyed population (N?=?1407), 581 patients were currently being treated, 503 had never been treated, and 323 had previously been treated. Among patients never treated for osteoporosis, the highest ranking reasons for non-treatment were the use of alternative treatments such as over-the-counter vitamins/supplements (57.5 % of respondents) and fear of side effects (43.9 %). Among previously treated patients, frequent reasons for discontinuation included the direction of the physician (41.2 % of respondents), concerns about long-term safety (30.3 %), and the experience of side effects (29.8 %). When asked about their willingness to restart their osteoporosis medication, previously treated patients who were not willing (N?=?104) to restart had a higher frequency of experiencing side effects (44.2 versus 20.5 % of those willing; P?<?0.001).From the osteoporosis patient's perspective, barriers to prescription treatment include a preference for alternative, non-prescription treatments and a fear of possible side effects. Side effects are one of the most common reasons for discontinuing osteoporosis medications, and they appear to be associated with a lack of willingness to restart treatment.
| S-EPMC4851700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2012, CDC launched the first federally funded national mass media antismoking campaign. The Tips From Former Smokers (Tips) campaign resulted in a 12% relative increase in population-level quit attempts.Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted in 2013 to evaluate Tips from a funding agency's perspective.Estimates of sustained cessations; premature deaths averted; undiscounted life years (LYs) saved; and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained by Tips were estimated.Tips saved about 179,099 QALYs and prevented 17,109 premature deaths in the U.S. With the campaign cost of roughly $48 million, Tips spent approximately $480 per quitter, $2,819 per premature death averted, $393 per LY saved, and $268 per QALY gained.Tips was not only successful at reducing smoking-attributable morbidity and mortality but also was a highly cost-effective mass media intervention.
| S-EPMC4603744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In a climate of increased expectation for the translation of research, academic clinical research units are looking at new ways to streamline their operation and maintain effective translational support services. Clinical research, although undeniably expensive, is an essential step in the translation of any medical breakthrough, and as a result, many academic clinical research units are actively looking to expand their clinical services despite financial pressures. We examine some of the hybrid academic-business models in 19 clinical research centers within the Clinical and Translational Science Award consortium that are emerging to address the issue of cost recovery of clinical research that is supported by the United States federal government. We identify initiatives that have succeeded or failed, essential supporting and regulatory components, and lessons learned from experience to design an optimal cost recovery model and a timeline for its implementation.
| S-EPMC3523334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:During the 2018-2019 influenza season, vaccination coverage among U.S. children was 62.6%. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of influenza vaccinations among pediatric patients seen in U.S. health centers, and to explore potential disparities in vaccination coverage among subpopulations. Funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, these health centers provide primary and preventive care to underserved and vulnerable individuals and families in order to reduce health disparities based on economic, geographic, or cultural barriers. METHODS:Cross-sectional data, analyzed in 2019, came from the most recent waves of the Health Center Patient Survey (2009, 2014). The sample consisted of children ages 2-17 years receiving care from HRSA-funded health centers. The outcome of interest was self- or parent-reported receipt of influenza vaccine in the past year. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted prevalence rate ratios for the association between demographic characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty level, urban/rural residence, geographic region), health-related variables (receipt of well-child check-up, asthma diagnosis), and influenza vaccination. RESULTS:Influenza vaccination coverage among pediatric health center patients increased from 46.6% in 2009 to 67.8% in 2014. In the adjusted model for 2014, there were few statistically significant differences in vaccination coverage among subpopulation groups, however American Indian/Alaska Native children had 31% increased vaccination coverage compared with non-Hispanic White children (aPRR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02-1.60) and children living in the South had 26% decreased vaccination coverage compared with those living in the Northeast (aPRR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.54-0.93). CONCLUSIONS:Influenza vaccination coverage among pediatric health center patients in 2014 exceeded the national average (as of 2018-2019), and few differences were found among at-risk subpopulations. HRSA-funded health centers are well-positioned to further increase the vaccination rate among children living in underserved communities.
| S-EPMC7378489 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medications endorsed by clinical practice guidelines, such as cardiovascular medications, could still have risks that outweigh potential benefits, and could thus warrant deprescribing. OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study was to develop a framework of facilitators and barriers specific to deprescribing cardiovascular medications in the setting of uncertain benefit. Given the frequent use of ?-blockers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and its uncertain benefits with potential for harm, we used this scenario as an example case for a cardiovascular medication that may be reasonable to deprescribe. METHODS:We conducted one-on-one, semi-structured interviews of older adults until we reached thematic saturation. Two coders independently reviewed each interview, and developed codes using deductive thematic analysis based on a prior conceptual framework for deprescribing. Subthemes and themes were finalized with a third coder. RESULTS:Ten participants were interviewed. We identified three key previously described patient-reported facilitators to deprescribing: (1) appropriateness of cessation; (2) process of cessation; and (3) dislike of medications; and identified three key previously described patient-reported barriers: (1) appropriateness of cessation; (2) process of cessation; and (3) fear. We found that these facilitators and barriers often co-occurred within the same individual. This observation, coupled with subthemes from our patient interviews, yielded two barriers to deprescribing specific to cardiovascular medications-uncertainty and conflicting attitudes. CONCLUSION:We adapted a new framework of patient-reported barriers and facilitators specific to deprescribing cardiovascular medications. In addition to addressing barriers previously described, future deprescribing interventions targeting cardiovascular medications must also address uncertainty and conflicting attitudes.
| S-EPMC7339041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many effective medical therapies are available for treating neurological diseases, but these therapies tend to be expensive and adherence is critical to their effectiveness. We used patient-reported data to examine the frequency and determinants of financial barriers to medication adherence among individuals treated for neurological disorders.Patients completed cross-sectional surveys on iPads as part of routine outpatient care in a neurology clinic. Survey responses from a 3-month period were collected and merged with administrative sources of demographic and clinical information (eg, insurance type). We explored the association between patient characteristics and patient-reported failure to refill prescription medication due to cost in the previous 12 months, termed here as "nonadherence".The population studied comprised 6075 adults who were presented between July and September 2015 for outpatient neurology appointments. The mean age of participants was 56 (standard deviation: 18) years, and 1613 (54%) were females. The patients who participated in the surveys (2992, 49%) were comparable to nonparticipants with respect to gender and ethnicity but more often identified English as their preferred language (94% vs 6%, p<0.01). Among respondents, 9.8% (n=265) reported nonadherence that varied by condition. These patients were more frequently Hispanic (16.7% vs 9.8% white, p=0.01), living alone (13.9% vs 8.9% cohabitating, p<0.01), and preferred a language other than English (15.3% vs 9.4%, p=0.02).Overall, the magnitude of financial barriers to medication adherence appears to vary across neurological conditions and demographic characteristics.
| S-EPMC5117903 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThere is a great deal of variation in the design and delivery of patient navigator (PN) programs, making it difficult to design or adopt these interventions in new contexts. We (1) systematically reviewed the literature to generate a preliminary program theory to describe how patient navigator interventions are designed and delivered; and (2) describe how the resulting program theory was applied in context to inform a prototype for a patient navigator program.MethodsThe current study includes a secondary review of a larger systematic review. We reviewed studies included in the primary review to identify those that designed and evaluated programs to assist patients in accessing and/or adhering to care. We conducted a content analysis of included publications to describe the barriers targeted by PN interventions and the navigator activities addressing those barriers. A program theory was constructed by mapping patient navigator activities to corresponding constructs within the capability-opportunity-motivation model of behavior change (COM-B) model of behavior change. The program theory was then presented to individuals with chronic disease, healthcare providers, and system stakeholders, and refined iteratively based on feedback.ResultsTwenty one publications describing 19 patient navigator interventions were included. A total of 17 unique patient navigator activities were reported. The most common included providing education, facilitating referrals, providing social and emotional support, and supporting self-management. The majority of navigator activities targeted barriers to physical opportunity, including facilitating insurance claims, assistance with scheduling, and providing transportation. Across all interventions, navigator activities were designed to target a total of 20 patient barriers. Among interventions reporting positive effects, over two thirds targeted knowledge barriers, problems with scheduling, proactive re-scheduling following a missed appointment, and insurance. The final program design included a total of 13 navigator activities-10 informed by the original program theory and 3 unique activities informed by stakeholders.ConclusionsThere is considerable heterogeneity in intervention content across patient navigator interventions. Our results provide a schema from which to develop PN interventions and illustrate how an evidence-based model was used to develop a real-world PN intervention. Our findings also highlight a critical need to improve the reporting of intervention components to facilitate translation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42013005857.
| S-EPMC6323765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are suboptimal. The most important barriers identified by patients are poorly understood. A comprehensive assessment of barriers to all recommended modalities is needed.MethodsIn 2007, a questionnaire was mailed to 6100 patients, aged 50-75 years, from 12 family medicine practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network. People aged 65-75 years and African Americans were oversampled. Patients were asked to rate 19-21 barriers to each of four recommended tests. In 2008, responses were coded on a 5-point scale; higher scores reflected stronger barrier endorsement.ResultsThe response rate was 55% (n=3357). Approximately 40% of respondents were aged >/=65 years, 30% were African-American, and 73% were adherent to screening. A clinician's failure to suggest screening and not knowing testing was necessary received the highest mean scores as barriers. Financial concerns and misconceptions were also cited. Barrier scores differed depending on whether respondents were never screened, overdue for screening, or adherent to guidelines. The top five barriers for each modality included test-specific barriers (e.g., handling stool, bowel preparation), which often outranked generic barriers to screening. Not knowing testing was necessary was a top barrier for all tests but colonoscopy.ConclusionsAlthough physician advice and awareness of the need for screening are important, barriers to screening are not homogenous across tests, and test-specific barriers warrant consideration in designing strategies to improve screening rates. Barrier scores differ by screening status, highlighting the need to address prior screening experience. Evidence that patients are more familiar with colonoscopy than with other modalities suggests an opportunity to improve screening rates by educating patients about alternative tests.
| S-EPMC2946819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBarriers experienced by patients influence the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior research has quantified how often patients encounter these challenges but has generally not revealed their complex perspective and experience with barriers.PurposeThis mixed-methods study was conducted to understand current perspectives on CRC screening.MethodsA two-part, mixed-methods study was conducted of primary care patients recruited from Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network practices. First, in June-July 2005 a survey was mailed to 660 patients aged 50-75 years posing an open-ended question about "the most important barrier" to CRC screening. Second, beginning in October 2005, seven gender- and largely race-specific focus groups involving 40 patients aged 45-75 years were conducted. Beginning in October 2005, survey verbatim responses were coded and quantitatively analyzed and focus group transcripts were qualitatively analyzed.ResultsResponses to the open-ended survey question, answered by 74% of respondents, identified fear and the bowel preparation as the most important barriers to screening. Only 1.6% of responses cited the absence of physician advice. Focus group participants cited similar issues and other previously reported barriers, but their remarks exposed the intricacies of complex barriers, such as fear, lack of information, time, the role of physicians, and access to care. Participants also cited barriers that have little documentation in the literature, such as low self-worth, "para-sexual" sensitivities, fatalism, negative past experiences with testing, and skepticism about the financial motivation behind screening recommendations.ConclusionsMixed-methods analysis helps to disaggregate the complex nuances that influence patient behavior. In the present study, patients explained the web of influences on knowledge, motivation, and ability to undergo CRC screening, which clinicians and policymakers should consider in designing interventions to increase the level of screening.
| S-EPMC2946825 | biostudies-literature