Change agents in the oncology workforce: Let's be clear about community health workers and patient navigators

Relationship Between Fatalistic Cancer Beliefs and Risky Health Behaviors

BACKGROUND

There is limited research on how fatalism influences risky health behaviors that are linked to higher cancer risks. This study investigates the relationship between risky health behaviors (tobacco smoking, electronic cigarette use, and heavy alcohol drinking) and fatalistic cancer beliefs while controlling for health care-related self-efficacy and sociodemographic and clinical factors among adults without a history of cancer.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional data from the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 5 Cycle 4. The study sample included noninstitutionalized adults (aged ≥18 years without a self-reported cancer history (n = 2464). The outcome variable was risky health behaviors comprised of tobacco smoking, electronic cigarette use, and heavy alcohol drinking. We combined these 3 risky behaviors into a binary variable (0, not having risky health behavior; 1, having ≥1 risky health behavior). The key independent variable was cancer fatalistic beliefs. We used descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 50% of the sample were women, 64.7% of participants self-identified as non-Hispanic White, 16.4% as Hispanic, and 10.6% as non-Hispanic Black. About 43% of participants reported having at least one risky health behavior. While holding all other factors constant, each unit increase in cancer fatalism score was associated with 30.0% higher odds of increased risky health behaviors (odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.62, P = .021) among adults without a history of cancer.

CONCLUSION

By understanding the relationship between cancer-related fatalistic beliefs and risky health behaviors, cancer prevention outreach programs can be personalized to suit the unique needs of specific individuals and communities.

Challenges and Solutions to Support Oncology Professionals Serving Underserved Populations With Cancer in the United States: Results From the ASCO Serving the Underserved Task Force

PURPOSE

Little data exist regarding approaches to support oncology professionals who deliver cancer care for underserved populations. In response, ASCO developed the Serving the Underserved Task Force to learn from and support oncology professionals serving underserved populations.

METHODS

The Task Force developed a 28-question survey to assess oncology professionals' experiences and strategies to support their work caring for underserved populations. The survey was deployed via an online link to 600 oncology professionals and assessed respondent and patient demographic characteristics, clinic-based processes to coordinate health-related social services, and strategies for professional society support and engagement. We used chi-square tests to evaluate whether there were associations between percent full-time equivalent (FTE) effort serving underserved populations (<50% FTE v ≥50% FTE) with responses.

RESULTS

Of 462 respondents who completed the survey (77% response rate), 79 (17.1%) were Asian; 30 (6.5%) Black; 43 (9.3%) Hispanic or Latino/Latina; and 277 (60%) White. The majority (n = 366, 79.2%) had a medical doctor degree (MD). A total of 174 (37.7%) had <25% FTE, 151 (32.7%) had 25%-50% FTE, and 121 (26.2%) had ≥50% FTE effort serving underserved populations. Most best guessed patients' sociodemographic characteristics (n = 388; 84%), while 42 (9.2%) used data collected by the clinic. Social workers coordinated most health-related social services. However, in clinical settings with high proportions of underserved patients, there was greater reliance on nonclinical personnel, such as navigators (odds ratio [OR], 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07 to 4.33]) or no individual (OR, 2.55 [95% CI, 1.14 to 5.72]) for addressing mental health needs and greater reliance on physicians or advance practice practitioners (OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.11 to 5.81]) or no individual (OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.09 to 3.35]) for addressing childcare or eldercare needs compared with social workers. Prioritization of solutions, which did not differ by FTE effort serving underserved populations, included a return-on-investment model to support personnel, integrated health-related social needs screening, and collaboration with the professional society on advocacy and policy.

CONCLUSION

The findings highlight crucial strategies that professional societies can implement to support oncology clinicians serving underserved populations with cancer.

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.