Prevalence and predictors of colon and prostate cancer screening among volunteer firefighters: The United States Firefighter Cancer Assessment and Prevention Study

BACKGROUND

Although firefighters have increased risk for colon and prostate cancer, limited information exists on screening practices for these cancers in volunteer firefighters who compose two-thirds of the US fire service. We estimated the prevalence of colon and prostate cancer screening among volunteer firefighters using eligibility criteria from 4 evidence-based screening recommendations and evaluated factors influencing screening.

METHODS

We evaluated colon (n = 569) and prostate (n = 498) cancer screening prevalence in a sample of US volunteer firefighters using eligibility criteria from the US Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF), National Fire Protection Association, American Cancer Society, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. We assessed associations with fire service experience, demographics, and cancer risk perception based on USPSTF guidelines.

RESULTS

For those eligible based on USPSTF guidelines, colon and prostate cancer screening prevalence was 51.7% (95% CI: 45.7, 57.8) and 48.8% (95% CI: 40.0, 57.6), respectively. Higher odds of colon and prostate cancer screening were observed with older age and with some college education compared to those with less education. Fire service experience and cancer risk perception were not associated with screening practices.

CONCLUSION

This is the first large study to assess colon and prostate cancer screening among US volunteer firefighters based on different screening guidelines. Our findings suggest gaps in cancer prevention efforts in the US volunteer fire service. Promoting cancer screening education and opportunities for volunteer firefighters by their fire departments, healthcare professionals, and public health practitioners, may help to address the gaps.

The TELEhealth Shared decision-making Coaching and Navigation in Primary carE (TELESCOPE) intervention: a study protocol for delivering shared decision-making for lung cancer screening by patient navigators

Background

Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality but has potential harms for patients. A shared decision-making (SDM) conversation about LCS is required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for LCS reimbursement. To overcome barriers to SDM in primary care, this protocol describes a telehealth decision coaching intervention for LCS in primary care clinics delivered by patient navigators. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention and its implementation potential, compared with an enhanced usual care (EUC) arm.

Methods

Patients (n = 420) of primary care clinicians (n = 120) are being recruited to a cluster randomized controlled trial. Clinicians are randomly assigned to 1) TELESCOPE intervention: prior to an upcoming non-acute clinic visit, patients participate in a telehealth decision coaching session about LCS delivered by trained patient navigators and nurse navigators place a low-dose CT scan (LDCT) order for each TELESCOPE patient wanting LCS, or 2) EUC: patients receive enhanced usual care from a clinician. Usual care is enhanced by providing clinicians in both arms with access to a Continuing Medical Education (CME) webinar about LCS and an LCS discussion guide. Patients complete surveys at baseline and 1-week after the scheduled clinic visit to assess quality of the SDM process. Re-navigation is attempted with TELESCOPE patients who have not completed the LDCT within 3 months. One month before being due for an annual screening, TELESCOPE patients whose initial LCS showed low-risk findings are randomly assigned to receive a telehealth decision coaching booster session with a navigator or no booster. Electronic health records are abstracted at 6, 12 and 18 months after the initial decision coaching session (TELESCOPE) or clinic visit (EUC) to assess initial and annual LCS uptake, imaging results, follow-up testing for abnormal findings, cancer diagnoses, treatment, and tobacco treatment referrals. This study will evaluate factors that facilitate or interfere with program implementation using mixed methods.

Discussion

We will assess whether a decision coaching and patient navigation intervention can feasibly support high-quality SDM for LCS and guideline-concordant LCS uptake for patients in busy primary care practices serving diverse patient populations.

Trial Registration

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05491213) on August 4, 2022.

Measurement of cigarette relighting: A common but understudied behavior

OBJECTIVE

Relighting, i.e., extinguishing, saving, and later relighting and smoking unfinished cigarettes, appears prevalent, may be associated with nicotine dependence and negative health outcomes, yet is poorly understood. We estimate the prevalence, frequency, correlates of, and reasons for, cigarette relighting.

METHODS

Survey respondents (n=676) were 18-45-year-old US-based Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) participants who smoked cigarettes every/some days. Items assessed frequency of and reasons for relighting. Reported smoking sessions per day were compared to calculations based on reported cigarettes per day (CPD) and relighting frequency.

RESULTS

Seventy-two percent of those who smoked reported relighting cigarettes. Reasons included not having time to finish (77%), not feeling like finishing (75%), saving money or avoiding wasting (70%), and making cigarettes last longer (59%). Nearly half (44%) relight to cut down and 34% to reduce harm. Hispanic (OR=1.73, CI:1.03-2.91) and non-Hispanic Black respondents (OR= 2.23, CI:1.20-4.10) had higher odds of relighting than others, as did those who smoke within 30minutes of waking (OR=2.45, CI:1.33-4.52) or wake up at night to smoke (OR=2.40, CI:1.68-3.44) (all ps <0.05). Respondents demonstrated low consistency in reporting the number of times they smoke (first-lit and relit) compared to calculations based on CPD and relighting frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

Relighting is associated with race, ethnicity, nicotine dependence, and is often done to save money, cut down smoking, and reduce harm. Among those who relight, "smoking session" frequency seemed to be underestimated. Single item smoking frequency measures may not be ideal for individuals who smoke and relight.

Electronic Health Record Prompt to Improve Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the U.S. Combusted tobacco use, the primary risk factor, accounts for 90% of all lung cancers. Early detection of lung cancer improves survival, yet lung cancer screening rates are much lower than those of other cancer screening tests. Electronic health record (EHR) systems are an underutilized tool that could improve screening rates.

METHODS

This study was conducted in the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical Group, a university-affiliated network in New Brunswick, NJ. Two novel EHR workflow prompts were implemented on July 1, 2018. These prompts included fields to determine tobacco use and lung cancer screening eligibility and facilitated low-dose computed tomography ordering for eligible patients. The prompts were designed to improve tobacco use data entry, allowing for better lung cancer screening eligibility identification. Data were analyzed in 2022 retrospectively for the period July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2019. The analyses represented 48,704 total patient visits.

RESULTS

The adjusted odds of patient record completeness to determine eligibility for low-dose computed tomography (AOR=1.19, 95% CI=1.15, 1.23), eligibility for low-dose computed tomography (AOR=1.59, 95% CI=1.38, 1.82), and whether low-dose computed tomography was ordered (AOR=1.04, 95% CI=1.01, 1.07) all significantly increased after the electronic medical record prompts were implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show the utility and benefit of EHR prompts in primary care settings to increase identification for lung cancer screening eligibility as well as increased low-dose computed tomography ordering.

Prevalence and predictors of skin cancer screening among a sample of US volunteer firefighters

BACKGROUND

Firefighters have a higher risk of melanoma incidence and mortality compared to the general population. In the United States (US), the National Fire Protection Association recommends all firefighters receive annual skin cancer screening through visual skin examination by a clinician. However, there is limited information on skin cancer screening practices among volunteer firefighters who comprise two-thirds of the US fire service.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study of 552 US volunteer firefighters estimated the prevalence of skin cancer screening and evaluated associations with their fire service experience, demographics, sun protection practices, and cancer risk perception.

RESULTS

The prevalence of receiving skin cancer screening among volunteer firefighters was 26.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.4, 29.8). The odds of being screened for skin cancer, compared to not being screened, were twice as high for firefighters who used sunscreen (odds ratio [OR]: 2.35, 95% CI: 1.48, 3.73) and who perceived their skin likely to burn with prolonged sun exposure (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.10, 3.00). Older age, some college education, and family history of skin cancer were also positively associated with skin cancer screening. A positive exposure-response relationship was observed between more monthly firefighting calls and receiving screening. Cancer risk perception was not associated with screening.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first large study to assess skin cancer screening among US volunteer firefighters. Our findings suggest gaps in skin cancer prevention efforts in the volunteer fire service. Additional assessment of skin cancer prevention practices within volunteer fire departments could help address these gaps.

US Physicians' Self-reported Discussions About Tobacco-Free Nicotine Pouches During Clinical Encounters With Patients in 2021

This survey study assesses the extent to which physicians discussed tobacco-free nicotine pouches during clinical encounters with patients.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tobacco Treatment Program Implementation at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted cancer screening and treatment delivery, but COVID-19's impact on tobacco cessation treatment for cancer patients who smoke has not been widely explored.

AIMS AND METHODS

We conducted a sequential cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 34 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers participating in NCI's Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I), across three reporting periods: one prior to COVID-19 (January-June 2019) and two during the pandemic (January-June 2020, January-June 2021). Using McNemar's Test of Homogeneity, we assessed changes in services offered and implementation activities over time.

RESULTS

The proportion of centers offering remote treatment services increased each year for Quitline referrals (56%, 68%, and 91%; p = .000), telephone counseling (59%, 79%, and 94%; p = .002), and referrals to Smokefree TXT (27%, 47%, and 56%; p = .006). Centers offering video-based counseling increased from 2020 to 2021 (18% to 59%; p = .006), Fewer than 10% of centers reported laying off tobacco treatment staff. Compared to early 2020, in 2021 C3I centers reported improvements in their ability to maintain staff and clinician morale, refer to external treatment services, train providers to deliver tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid transition to new telehealth program delivery of tobacco treatment for patients with cancer. C3I cancer centers adjusted rapidly to challenges presented by the pandemic, with improvements reported in staff morale and ability to train providers, refer patients to tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. These factors enabled C3I centers to sustain evidence-based tobacco treatment implementation during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

IMPLICATIONS

This work describes how NCI-designated cancer centers participating in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) adapted to challenges to sustain evidence-based tobacco use treatment programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work offers a model for resilience and rapid transition to remote tobacco treatment services delivery and proposes a policy and research agenda for telehealth services as an approach to sustaining evidence-based tobacco treatment programs.

Tobacco Treatment Knowledge and Practices Among US Psychiatrists

This study explores the extent to which psychiatrists are familiar with, and utilize, the USPHS guidelines for treating tobacco use and dependence (i.e., the 5A's), deliver cessation treatment, and the barriers they perceive to doing so. An original, national survey of 141 psychiatrists revealed that most Ask patients if they smoke (81.6%). Fewer Advise them to stop (78.7%) and Assess their willingness to quit (73.6%). A minority Assist with a quit plan (15.9%) and Arrange for follow-up (26.4%). Just 11.9% have used the USPHS guidelines in clinical practice; 37% have never heard of them. Even among those who say they have used the USPHS guidelines, implementation of the 5A's is quite low. Time-related factors were the most common barriers to cessation delivery (51.4%). Patient factors (30%) and financial/resource factors (25%) were less common. There is a strong need for increased implementation of clinical guidelines for evidence-based tobacco treatments among psychiatrists.

Perceived effectiveness of cancer screening among family medicine and internal medicine physicians in the United States

•

There are limited data on family medicine and internal medicine physicians’ beliefs regarding perceived cancer screening effectiveness.

•

Perceiving specific cancer screening tests as very effective differed in some cases by gender, age, graduation year, and race/ethnicity.

•

Physicians’ perceived effectiveness about cancer screening tests varies widely and may influence their recommendations or usage of these tests.

•

Understanding physicians’ beliefs on screening effectiveness can help improve uptake of evidence-based screening by providers and patients to promote early detection and successful treatment.

Family and internal medicine physicians play an important role in cancer screening, yet there are limited data on their beliefs regarding effectiveness of screening tests, which may affect physicians’ likelihood to recommend such tests. The study purpose was to assess current beliefs among family medicine and internal medicine physicians regarding effectiveness of various types of cancer screening. A national sample of 582 physicians from the American Medical Association’s Physician Masterfile were surveyed. Participants were asked about their perceived effectiveness of screening for colon, lung, breast, prostate, and cervical cancer among average, healthy individuals. Chi-square tests were conducted to assess relationships between perceiving screening tests to be ‘very effective in reducing cancer-related mortality’ and demographic characteristics. A substantial majority of physicians perceived colonoscopy (83.8%) and Pap smear (82.9%) to be very effective. Perceiving low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), Pap smear, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as ‘very effective’ differed by gender, with females less likely to endorse LDCT and Pap smear but more likely to endorse PSA. Perceiving PSA as ‘very effective’ differed by age and graduation year, with younger or more recently graduated physicians being less likely to perceive PSA as ‘very effective’. Non-Hispanic Black/African-American physicians were more likely to perceive mammography as ‘very effective’ than other groups. Physicians’ perceived effectiveness about cancer screening tests varies widely and may influence their recommendations or usage of these tests. Understanding physicians’ beliefs can help in improving uptake of evidence-based screening tests by providers and patients to promote early detection and successful treatment.

Lung Cancer Screening Knowledge and Perceived Barriers Among US Physicians

Introduction

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States and has historically been detected late in its course. Low-dose computed tomography scan (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality by 20% and is currently recommended by clinical practice guidelines. However, compared with other cancer screening modalities, LDCT utilization remains low. This study surveyed office-based primary care physicians across the United States to better understand LDCT utilization.

Methods

A total of 1500 family and internal medicine physicians selected from the American Medical Association’s physician master file were surveyed between April and July 2019 regarding LDCT practices, eligibility, clinical scenarios, and perceived barriers.

Results

The American Association for Public Opinion Research response rate 3 was 59% (652 respondents); 599 completed supplemental questions regarding lung cancer screening. A total of 88% of respondents discussed LDCT in the previous year, and 78% had ordered at least one LDCT. Most (59%) knew the tobacco exposure criteria for LDCT and correctly identified appropriate clinical scenarios (49%–86% responded correctly). Less than half of respondents correctly identified the age eligibility criteria (44%–45% responded correctly). In general, male physicians, those who graduated after 1990, and family medicine physicians were more likely to report accurate knowledge regarding LDCT eligibility. The top perceived barriers to LDCT were cost to the patient (48% identified as a major barrier), insurance not covering screening (46% major), and patients being unaware of lung cancer screening (40% major).

Conclusion

Knowledge and practices about lung cancer screening are improving, though remain suboptimal. The most common barriers remain cost or insurance-based and suggest the need for a systems-based response to increase awareness and reduce the underutilization of LDCT.

Communication Between US Physicians and Patients Regarding Electronic Cigarette Use

IMPORTANCE

Physicians play a primary role in patient smoking cessation, yet their communication regarding e-cigarettes is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

To assess physician-patient communication regarding e-cigarettes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A national cross-sectional survey in 2018 and 2019 was conducted. Participants were invited by mail; surveys were completed online. Respondents were 2058 board-certified physicians from family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, cardiology, pulmonary, and oncology. Data were analyzed from August to September 2021.

EXPOSURES

Physician demographic characteristics, tobacco use, medical specialty, and harm-reduction beliefs (ie, not all tobacco products are equally harmful) applied within 2 hypothetical clinical scenarios.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Physicians' self-reported e-cigarette communication (being asked about e-cigarettes by patients and recommending e-cigarettes to patients) and hypothetical e-cigarette communication in 2 clinical scenarios.

RESULTS

Among 2058 physicians, the mean (SD) age was 51.6 (10.5) years, and 1173 (58.5%) were male. More than 60% of physicians believed all tobacco products to be equally harmful. Overall, 69.8% of physicians reported ever being asked about e-cigarettes by their patients (35.9% in the past 30 days), and 21.7% reported ever recommending e-cigarettes to a patient (9.8% in the past 30 days). Pulmonologists (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.14, 95% CI, 1.10-4.16) and cardiologists (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.03-4.05), as well as physicians who implemented the US Public Health Service Clinical Practice Guidelines (aOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.12-2.80), had greater odds of recommending e-cigarettes to patients. Physicians who endorsed a harm-reduction perspective (aOR, 3.04, 95% CI, 2.15-4.31) and had ever smoked cigarettes (aOR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.27-3.08) were significantly more likely to recommend e-cigarettes. Physicians who reported being asked about e-cigarettes had greater odds of recommending e-cigarettes (aOR, 16.60; 95% CI, 10.33-26.68). In clinical scenarios, physicians were overall more likely to recommend e-cigarettes for cessation to an older heavy smoker with multiple unsuccessful quit attempts (49.3%; 95% CI, 47.1%-51.4%) than a younger light smoker with no prior cessation treatments (15.2%; 95% CI, 13.6%-16.7%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this survey study of physicians, findings suggest that physicians may recommend switching to e-cigarettes for some patients who smoke cigarettes under certain circumstances, presumably for cessation. The belief that all tobacco products are equally harmful was associated with lower rates of recommending e-cigarettes. As the evidence base grows for e-cigarette efficacy for smoking cessation, there is need for physician education regarding e-cigarette efficacy.

Over 1 year later: smokers' EVALI awareness, knowledge and perceived impact on e-cigarette interest

OBJECTIVES

The e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) outbreak caused serious lung injuries in over 2800 people in the USA in 2019. By February 2020, most cases were determined as linked with vaping tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), including black market products using vitamin E acetate. This study examined smokers' EVALI awareness, knowledge and perceived impact on their e-cigarette interest approximately 16 months after its peak.

DESIGN

Between January and February 2021, we surveyed 1018 adult current smokers from a nationally representative US research panel. Participants were asked if they had heard about EVALI prior to COVID-19, knew its main cause, and if EVALI had impacted their interest in future e-cigarette use.

RESULTS

Approximately 54% of smokers had heard of EVALI. Among those who had heard of EVALI (n=542), 37.3% believed its main cause was e-cigarettes used to vape nicotine, like JUUL. Fewer (16.6%) thought the main cause was products for vaping marijuana/THC, and 20.2% did not know. About 29% had heard vitamin E acetate was associated with EVALI, and 50.9% indicated EVALI made them less interested in using e-cigarettes in the future. EVALI awareness was significantly associated with e-cigarette risk perceptions (ie, that e-cigarettes are as harmful as smoking).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the passage of time, considerable lack of knowledge and misperceptions about EVALI remain among those who smoke. Our findings suggest the need for continued efforts to promote better understanding of EVALI and appropriate behavioural and policy responses.

Tobacco Treatment Guideline Use and Predictors Among U.S. Physicians by Specialty

INTRODUCTION

Physicians play a critical role in tobacco treatment, being a frequent link to smokers and a trusted source of information. Unfortunately, barriers exist that limit physicians' implementation of evidence-based interventions. This study examines the implementation and predictors of the Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange model of tobacco treatment clinical guidelines among U.S. physicians.

METHODS

A national sample of 1,058 U.S. physicians from 6 specialties (family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, cardiology, pulmonology, and oncology) were surveyed in 2018 (51.8% response rate). Survey domains included demographics, awareness of the guidelines, tobacco treatment practices (i.e., Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange model), perceived barriers to treatment, and perceived efficacy of various treatments. Multiple logistic regression analyzed the predictors of implementing guideline activities.

RESULTS

Mean age was 51.3 years, with the majority male (64.4%) and non-Hispanic White (63.9%). Nearly all physicians reported asking patients whether they smoke (95.6%) and advising them to stop (94.8%), slightly fewer assessed the readiness to quit (86.5%), and only a minority assisted with a quit plan (27.4%) or arranged a follow-up (18.6%). Only 18% reported using the U.S. Public Health Service Guidelines in clinical practice. Time-related factors were the most common barriers (53.4%), with patient factors (36.9%) and financial/resource factors (35.1%) cited less frequently. The predictors of implementing aspects of the Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange model included physician awareness and utilization of the U.S. Public Health Service Guidelines, specialty, and to a smaller degree, graduating before 1990, not reporting time as a barrier, patient barriers, sex, and higher perceived effectiveness of pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This national survey highlights the need for increased implementation of all aspects of the latest guidelines for evidence-based tobacco treatments, including community-based resources.

Smoking Cessation

Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and its harms are well established. Physicians have more evidence-based resources than ever before to effectively treat smoking, including new uses and combinations of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacotherapies and expanded community programs. In addition, electronic nicotine delivery systems are potential treatment tools, but their safety and efficacy need to be established. Finally, high-priority groups, such as persons with cancer diagnoses or hospitalized patients, may benefit from particular attention to their tobacco use.

Content Analysis of E-cigarette News Articles Amidst the 2019 Vaping-Associated Lung Injury (EVALI) Outbreak in the U.S

INTRODUCTION

News media can shape public perceptions about e-cigarettes, particularly in the context of ongoing uncertainty from the recent outbreak of e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI). This study aimed to characterize news articles published about e-cigarettes in 2019, including before and during the EVALI outbreak.

METHODS

Using 24 e-cigarette-related search terms, we gathered all articles published in leading print and online U.S. news sources in 2019 from databases (i.e., Factiva, Access World News) and archival websites (i.e., www.newspapers.com). We conducted a content analysis of e-cigarette themes and statements, identifying differences in themes between articles that did and did not mention EVALI.

RESULTS

Of the 1,643 e-cigarette news articles published in 2019, 62% mentioned EVALI. Frequency of e-cigarette articles peaked in September (n=532) at the height of the EVALI outbreak. Among all articles discussing e-cigarettes, the most prevalent main topics were policy/regulation (45%) and health effects (35%). Articles that mentioned EVALI frequently discussed youth e-cigarette use (40%) and JUUL (33%). Compared to non-EVALI articles, EVALI articles were more likely to discuss health effects (p<.001) but less likely to discuss policies/regulations, except for flavor bans (47% of EVALI articles vs. 39% of non-EVALI articles, p=.002). EVALI articles were also less likely to discuss e-cigarettes being less risky than cigarettes (p=.005).

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarette news coverage was prevalent in 2019, and patterns in frequency and content reflected major events (i.e., EVALI). In turn, news media can shape public perceptions, and even policy, about e-cigarettes and must continue to be monitored.

IMPLICATIONS

E-cigarette news coverage in 2019 was high, driven in large part by news coverage of the EVALI outbreak. Indeed, the peak in e-cigarette news articles in September directly coincided with the peak in EVALI cases in the U.S. Of note, articles that mentioned EVALI frequently discussed youth e-cigarette use, JUUL, and flavor bans, which may have triggered national and state-level policy responses, and likely influenced public perceptions (including misperceptions) regarding the harms of e-cigarettes.

Persistent Misperceptions about Nicotine among US Physicians: Results from a Randomized Survey Experiment

We conducted a survey experiment among US physicians to evaluate whether question wording impacted perceptions about the health effects of nicotine. 926 physicians were randomized to receive one of two versions of a question matrix that asked about the "extent to which they agree or disagree that 'nicotine' (Version 1) or 'nicotine, on its own,' (Version 2) directly contributes to" birth defects, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, depression, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated whether question condition predicted strong agreement and/or agreement with each statement, and assessed demographic correlates of each outcome while adjusting for question version. Physicians who received Version 2 were less likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly caused birth defects (Prevalence Ratio (PR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98), CVD (PR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.95), cancer (PR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87), and COPD (PR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72-0.84). Females were more likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly contributes to birth defects and cancer, and family physicians were most likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly contributes to CVD, cancer, and COPD. Question wording is important when measuring physicians' beliefs about nicotine; however, even after accounting for question version, misperceptions about the direct health effects of nicotine were common and varied by sex and specialty.

Fragmentation of Care Among Black Women With Breast Cancer and Comorbidities: The Role of Health Systems

PURPOSE

Black women are disproportionately burdened by comorbidities and breast cancer. The complexities of coordinating care for multiple health conditions can lead to adverse consequences. Care coordination may be exacerbated when care is received outside the same health system, defined as care fragmentation. We examine types of practice setting for primary and breast cancer care to assess care fragmentation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from a prospective cohort of Black women diagnosed with breast cancer in New Jersey who also had a prior diagnosis of diabetes and/or hypertension (N = 228). Following breast cancer diagnosis, we examined types of practice setting for first primary care visit and primary breast surgery, through medical chart abstraction, and identified whether care was used within or outside the same health system. We used multivariable logistic regression to explore sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with care fragmentation.

RESULTS

Diverse primary care settings were used: medical groups (32.0%), health systems (29.4%), solo practices (23.7%), Federally Qualified Health Centers (8.3%), and independent hospitals (6.1%). Surgical care predominately occurred in health systems (79.8%), with most hospitals being Commission on Cancer-accredited. Care fragmentation was experienced by 78.5% of Black women, and individual-level factors (age, health insurance, cancer stage, and comorbidity count) were not associated with care fragmentation (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of Black breast cancer survivors with comorbidities received primary care and surgical care in different health systems, illustrating care fragmentation. Strategies for care coordination and health care delivery across health systems and practice settings are needed for health equity.

Perceived Health Risks Among Firefighters; The New Jersey Firefighter Health Survey

OBJECTIVE

There is a growing literature on the risk of chronic disease among firefighters, including cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. However there is little information on firefighter's perception thereof.

METHODS

Firefighters attending a union convention in New Jersey completed a survey with four domains: firefighting experience; perceived additional risk for chronic diseases (six-point Likert scale); cancer screening history; demographics, and risk behaviors.

RESULTS

Among 167 enrolled firefighters, all were men and 86.6% active career. Median perceived risk ranged from high risk (colon, hematologic, breast, prostate, and testicular cancers) to very high risk (CVD, pulmonary diseases, all cancers, lung and oral cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

NJ Firefighters attributed considerable additional risk to acquiring chronic disease as a result of their firefighting activities. Understanding firefighter perceptions of their own morbidity and mortality will help develop future firefighter preparatory programs.

Patterns of chronic disease management and health outcomes in a population-based cohort of Black women with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Diabetes and hypertension are two common comorbidities that affect breast cancer patients, particularly Black women. Disruption of chronic disease management during cancer treatment has been speculated. Therefore, this study examined the implementation of clinical practice guidelines and health outcomes for these comorbidities before and during cancer treatment.

METHODS

We used a population-based, prospective cohort of Black women diagnosed with breast cancer (2012-2016) in New Jersey (n = 563). Chronic disease management for diabetes and hypertension was examined 12 months before and after breast cancer diagnosis and compared using McNemar's test for matched paired and paired t tests.

RESULTS

Among this cohort, 18.1% had a co-diagnosis of diabetes and 47.2% had a co-diagnosis of hypertension. Implementation of clinical practice guidelines and health outcomes that differed in the 12 months before and after cancer diagnosis included lipid screening (64.5% before versus 50.0% after diagnosis; p = 0.004), glucose screening (72.7% versus 90.7%; p < 0.001), and blood pressure control < 140/90 mmHg (57.6% versus 71.5%; p = 0.004) among patients with hypertension-only. For patients with diabetes, eye and foot care were low (< 35%) and optimal HbA1c < 8.0% was achieved for less than 50% of patients in both time periods.

CONCLUSION

Chronic disease management continued during cancer treatment; however, eye and foot exams for patients with diabetes and lipid screening for patients with hypertension-only were inadequate. Given that comorbidities may account for half of the Black-White breast cancer survival disparity, strategies are needed to improve chronic disease management during cancer, especially for Black women who bear a disproportionate burden of chronic diseases.

From the Deeming Rule to JUUL-US News Coverage of Electronic Cigarettes, 2015-2018

INTRODUCTION

News media may influence public perceptions and attitudes about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), which may influence product use and attitudes about their regulation. The purpose of this study is to describe trends in US news coverage of e-cigarettes during a period of evolving regulation, science, and trends in the use of e-cigarettes.

METHODS

We conducted a content analysis of e-cigarette topics and themes covered in US news articles from 2015 to 2018. Online news databases (Access World News, Factiva) were used to obtain US news articles from the top 34 circulating newspapers, four national wire services, and five leading online news sources.

RESULTS

The number of articles increased by 75.4% between 2015 and 2018 (n = 1609). Most articles focused on policy/regulation (43.5%) as a main topic, followed by health effects (22.3%) and prevalence/trends (17.9%). Discussion about flavor bans quadrupled (6.1% to 24.6%) and discussion of youth e-cigarette use was most prevalent (58.4%) in 2018, coinciding with an increase in coverage about JUUL. JUUL was mentioned in 50.8% of 2018 articles. Across years, articles more frequently mentioned e-cigarette risks (70%) than potential benefits (37.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarettes continue to be a newsworthy topic, with coverage both reflecting numerous changes and events over time, and providing repeated opportunities for informing the public and policymakers about these novel products. Future research should continue to track how discourse changes over time and assess its potential influence on e-cigarette perceptions and policy changes.

IMPLICATIONS

E-cigarette news coverage in the United States increased between 2015 and 2018 and predominantly focused on policy and regulation. Notable spikes in volume were associated with some but not all major e-cigarette events, including the FDA's deeming rule, Surgeon General's report, and release of the National Youth Tobacco Survey data in 2018. Coverage of the 2018 National Academy of Medicine, Engineering, and Sciences report on the Public Health Consequences of E-cigarettes received minimal news coverage. The high volume in 2018 was driven in large part by coverage of the e-cigarette brand JUUL; over half of news articles in 2018 referenced JUUL specifically.

A Retrospective Cohort Study of the Impact of Nurse Practitioners on Hospitalized Patient Outcomes

The role of advanced practice providers has expanded in the hospital setting. However, little data exist examining the impact of these providers. Our purpose was to determine the effect of adding nurse practitioners in a complementary role on the quality and efficiency of care of hospitalized patients. A retrospective cohort study evaluated adult patients admitted by private physicians (without house staff or non-physician providers) to a general medical-surgical unit in an academic medical center. The admissions department allocated patients as beds became available and nurse practitioners were assigned to patients until their caseload was reached. Outcomes included length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, admission costs, 30-day readmissions, transfer to a more intensive care level, and discharge order time. Of the 382 patients included in this study, 263 were assigned to the nurse practitioner group. Hospital mortality was lower in the nurse practitioner group [OR 0.11 (95% CI 0.02–0.51)] as was transfer to more intensive care level [OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.20–0.75)]; however, the nurse practitioner group had longer length of stay (geometric mean = 5.80 days for nurse practitioners, 3.63 days for no nurse practitioners; p < 0.0001) and higher cost per patient (geometric mean = USD 6631 vs. USD 5121; p = 0.005). The results were unchanged when models were adjusted for potential confounders. Adding nurse practitioners can yield improved clinical outcomes (lower hospital mortality and fewer transfers to intensive care), but with a potential economic expense (longer hospital stays and higher costs).

Comorbidity Management in Black Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer: the Role of Primary Care in Shared Care

BACKGROUND

Black women are more likely to have comorbidity at breast cancer diagnosis compared with White women, which may account for half of the Black-White survivor disparity. Comprehensive disease management requires a coordinated team of healthcare professionals including primary care practitioners, but few studies have examined shared care in the management of comorbidities during cancer care, especially among racial/ethnic minorities.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether the type of medical team composition is associated with optimal clinical care management of comorbidities.

DESIGN

We used the Women's Circle of Health Follow-up Study, a population-based cohort of Black women diagnosed with breast cancer. The likelihood of receiving optimal comorbidity management after breast cancer diagnosis was compared by type of medical team composition (shared care versus cancer specialists only) using binomial regression.

PARTICIPANTS

Black women with a co-diagnosis of diabetes and/or hypertension at breast cancer diagnosis between 2012 and 2016 (N = 274).

MAIN MEASURES

Outcome-optimal clinical care management of diabetes (i.e., A1C test, LDL-C test, and medical attention for nephropathy) and hypertension (i.e., lipid screening and prescription for hypertension medication). Main predictor-shared care, whether the patient received care from both a cancer specialist and a primary care provider and/or a medical specialist within the 12 months following a breast cancer diagnosis.

KEY RESULTS

Primary care providers were the main providers involved in managing comorbidities and 90% of patients received shared care during breast cancer care. Only 54% had optimal comorbidity management. Patients with shared care were five times (aRR: 4.62; 95% CI: 1.66, 12.84) more likely to have optimal comorbidity management compared with patients who only saw cancer specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

Suboptimal management of comorbidities during breast cancer care exists for Black women. However, our findings suggest that shared care is more beneficial at achieving optimal clinical care management for diabetes and hypertension than cancer specialists alone.

Electronic Cigarettes Induce Mitochondrial DNA Damage and Trigger TLR9 (Toll-Like Receptor 9)-Mediated Atherosclerosis

OBJECTIVE

Electronic cigarette (e-cig) use has recently been implicated in promoting atherosclerosis. In this study, we aimed to investigate the mechanism of e-cig exposure accelerated atherosclerotic lesion development. Approach and Results: Eight-week-old ApoE^-/- mice fed normal laboratory diet were exposed to e-cig vapor (ECV) for 2 hours/day, 5 days/week for 16 weeks. We found that ECV exposure significantly induced atherosclerotic lesions as examined by Oil Red O staining and greatly upregulated TLR9 (toll-like receptor 9) expression in classical monocytes and in the atherosclerotic plaques, which the latter was corroborated by enhanced TLR9 expression in human femoral artery atherosclerotic plaques from e-cig smokers. Intriguingly, we found a significant increase of oxidative mitochondria DNA lesion in the plasma of ECV-exposed mice. Administration of TLR9 antagonist before ECV exposure not only alleviated atherosclerosis and the upregulation of TLR9 in plaques but also attenuated the increase of plasma levels of inflammatory cytokines, reduced the plaque accumulation of lipid and macrophages, and decreased the frequency of blood CCR2⁺ (C-C chemokine receptor type 2) classical monocytes. Surprisingly, we found that cytoplasmic mitochondrial DNA isolated from ECV extract-treated macrophages can enhance TLR9 activation in reporter cells and the induction of inflammatory cytokine could be suppressed by TLR9 inhibitor in macrophages.

CONCLUSIONS

E-cig increases level of damaged mitochondrial DNA in circulating blood and induces the expression of TLR9, which elevate the expression of proinflammatory cytokines in monocyte/macrophage and consequently lead to atherosclerosis. Our results raise the possibility that intervention of TLR9 activation is a potential pharmacological target of ECV-related inflammation and cardiovascular diseases.