Group Versus Individual Educational Sessions With a Promotora and Hispanic/Latina Women's Satisfaction With Care in the Screening Mammography Setting: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Reporting of Participant Demographics in Clinical Trials Published in General Radiology Journals

OBJECTIVES

The reporting of research participant demographics provides insights into study generalizability. Our study aimed to determine the frequency at which participant age, sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) are reported and used for subgroup analyses in radiology randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and their secondary analyses; as well as the study characteristics associated with, and the classification systems used for demographics reporting.

METHODS

RCTs and their secondary analyses published in 8 leading radiology journals between 2013 and 2021 were included. Associations between study characteristics and demographic reporting were tested with the chi-square goodness of fit test for categorical variables, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for impact factor, and logistic regression for publication year.

RESULTS

Among 432 included articles, 89.4% (386) reported age, 90.3% (390) sex/gender, 5.6% (24) race/ethnicity, and 3.0% (13) SES. Among articles that reported these demographics and were not specific to a subgroup, results were analyzed by age in 14.2% (55/386), sex/gender in 19.4% (66/340), race/ethnicity in 13.6% (3/22), and SES in 46.2% (6/13). Journal, impact factor, and last author continent were predictors of race/ethnicity and SES reporting. Funding was associated with race/ethnicity reporting. No study reported sex and gender separately, or documented transgender, nonbinary gender spectrum or intersex participants. A single category for race/ethnicity was used in 37.5% (9/24) of studies, consisting of either "White" or "Caucasian."

CONCLUSION

The reporting of participant demographics in radiology trials is variable and not always representative of the population diversity. Editorial guidelines on the reporting and analysis of participant demographics could help standardize practices.

Re-envisioning, Retooling, and Rebuilding Prevention Science Methods to Address Structural and Systemic Racism and Promote Health Equity

The historic momentum from national conversations on the roots and current impacts of racism in the USA presents an incredible window of opportunity for prevention scientists to revisit how common theories, measurement tools, methodologies, and interventions can be radically re-envisioned, retooled, and rebuilt to dismantle racism and promote equitable health for minoritized communities. Recognizing this opportunity, the NIH-funded Prevention Science and Methodology Group (PSMG) launched a series of presentations focused on the role of Prevention Science to address racism and discrimination guided by a commitment to social justice and health equity. The current manuscript aims to advance the field of Prevention Science by summarizing key issues raised during the series' presentations and proposing concrete research priorities and steps that hold promise for promoting health equity by addressing systemic racism. Being anti-racist is an active practice for all of us, whether we identify as methodologists, interventionists, practitioners, funders, community members, or an intersection of these identities. We implore prevention scientists and methodologists to take on these conversations with us to promote science and practice that offers every life the right to live in a just and equitable world.

Strategies enhancing the patient experience in mammography: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

A positive experience in mammography is essential for increasing patient attendance and reattendance at these examinations, whether conducted for diagnostic or screening purposes. Mammograms indeed facilitate early disease detection, enhance the potential for cure, and consequently reduce breast cancer mortality. The main objective of this review was to identify and map the strategies aiming to improve the patient experience in diagnostic and screening mammography.

METHODS

This scoping review was performed following the JBI methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Searches were performed through databases of MEDLINE, Embase.com, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, and three clinical trial registries. This review considered studies evaluating the effect of interventions, occurring within the mammography department, on the patient experience.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 8113 citations of which 60, matching the inclusion criteria, were included. The strategies were classified into eight categories. The most represented one was breast compression and positioning, followed by relaxation techniques and analgesic care, communication and information, screening equipment, examination procedures, patient-related factors, physical environment, and finally staff characteristics. The studied outcomes related to patient experience were mainly pain, anxiety, comfort, and satisfaction. Other types of outcomes were also considered in the studies such as image quality, technical parameters, or radiation dose. Most studies were conducted by radiographers, on female patients, and none mentioned the inclusion of male or transgender patients.

CONCLUSION

This review outlined a diversity of strategies to improve patient experience, although technique-based interventions were predominant. Further research is warranted, notably on psychological strategies, and on men and transgender people.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This scoping review provides guidance to healthcare providers and services for better patient/client-centered care.

Interventions for improving health literacy in migrants

BACKGROUND

Health literacy (HL) is a determinant of health and important for autonomous decision-making. Migrants are at high risk for limited HL. Improving HL is important for equitable promotion of migrants' health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for improving HL in migrants. To assess whether female or male migrants respond differently to the identified interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran electronic searches to 2 February 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL. We also searched trial registries. We used a study filter for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (RCT classifier).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and cluster-RCTs addressing HL either as a concept or its components (access, understand, appraise, apply health information).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane and followed the PRISMA-E guidelines. Outcome categories were: a) HL, b) quality of life (QoL), c) knowledge, d) health outcomes, e) health behaviour, f) self-efficacy, g) health service use and h) adverse events. We conducted meta-analysis where possible, and reported the remaining results as a narrative synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 RCTs and six cluster-RCTs (8249 participants), all conducted in high-income countries. Participants were migrants with a wide range of conditions. All interventions were adapted to culture, language and literacy. We did not find evidence that HL interventions cause harm, but only two studies assessed adverse events (e.g. anxiety). Many studies reported results for short-term assessments (less than six weeks after total programme completion), reported here. For several comparisons, there were also findings at later time points, which are presented in the review text. Compared with no HL intervention (standard care/no intervention) or an unrelated HL intervention (similar intervention but different information topic) Self-management programmes (SMP) probably improve self-efficacy slightly (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.50; 2 studies, 333 participants; moderate certainty). SMP may improve HIV-related HL (understanding (mean difference (MD) 4.25, 95% CI 1.32 to 7.18); recognition of HIV terms (MD 3.32, 95% CI 1.28 to 5.36)) (1 study, 69 participants). SMP may slightly improve health behaviours (3 studies, 514 participants), but may have little or no effect on knowledge (2 studies, 321 participants) or subjective health status (MD 0.38, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.89; 1 study, 69 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain of the effects of SMP on QoL, health service use or adverse events due to a lack of evidence. HL skills building courses (HLSBC) may improve knowledge (MD 10.87, 95% CI 5.69 to 16.06; 2 studies, 111 participants) and any generic HL (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.75; 2 studies, 229 participants), but may have little or no effect on depression literacy (MD 0.17, 95% CI -1.28 to 1.62) or any health behaviour (2 studies, 229 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain if HLSBC improve QoL, health outcomes, health service use, self-efficacy or adverse events, due to very low-certainty or a lack of evidence. Audio-/visual education without personal feedback (AVE) probably improves depression literacy (MD 8.62, 95% CI 7.51 to 9.73; 1 study, 202 participants) and health service use (MD -0.59, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.07; 1 study, 157 participants), but probably has little or no effect on health behaviour (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.25; 1 study, 135 participants) (moderate certainty). AVE may improve self-efficacy (MD 3.51, 95% CI 2.53 to 4.49; 1 study, 133 participants) and may slightly improve knowledge (MD 8.44, 95% CI -2.56 to 19.44; 2 studies, 293 participants) and intention to seek depression treatment (MD 1.8, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.17), with little or no effect on depression (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.10) (low certainty). No evidence was found for QoL and adverse events. Adapted medical instruction may improve understanding of health information (3 studies, 478 participants), with little or no effect on medication adherence (MD 0.5, 95% CI -0.1 to 1.1; 1 study, 200 participants) (low certainty). No evidence was found for QoL, health outcomes, knowledge, health service use, self-efficacy or adverse events. Compared with written information on the same topic SMP probably improves health numeracy slightly (MD 0.7, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.25) and probably improves print literacy (MD 9, 95% CI 2.9 to 15.1; 1 study, 209 participants) and self-efficacy (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.64; 4 studies, 552 participants) (moderate certainty). SMP may improve any disease-specific HL (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.07; 4 studies, 955 participants), knowledge (MD 11.45, 95% CI 4.75 to 18.15; 6 studies, 1101 participants) and some health behaviours (4 studies, 797 participants), with little or no effect on health information appraisal (MD 1.15, 95% CI -0.23 to 2.53; 1 study, 329 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain whether SMP improves QoL, health outcomes, health service use or adverse events, due to a lack of evidence or low/very low-certainty evidence. AVE probably has little or no effect on diabetes HL (MD 2, 95% CI -0.15 to 4.15; 1 study, 240 participants), but probably improves information appraisal (MD -9.88, 95% CI -12.87 to -6.89) and application (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.77) (1 study, 608 participants; moderate certainty). AVE may slightly improve knowledge (MD 8.35, 95% CI -0.32 to 17.02; low certainty). No short-term evidence was found for QoL, depression, health behaviour, self-efficacy, health service use or adverse events. AVE compared with another AVE We are uncertain whether narrative videos are superior to factual knowledge videos as the evidence is of very low certainty. Gender differences Female migrants' diabetes HL may improve slightly more than that of males, when receiving AVE (MD 5.00, 95% CI 0.62 to 9.38; 1 study, 118 participants), but we do not know whether female or male migrants benefit differently from other interventions due to very low-certainty or a lack of evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Adequately powered studies measuring long-term effects (more than six months) of HL interventions in female and male migrants are needed, using well-validated tools and representing various healthcare systems.

Social Determinants of Health in Imaging-based Cancer Screening: A Case-based Primer with Strategies for Care Improvement

Health disparities, preventable differences in the burden of disease and disease outcomes often experienced by socially disadvantaged populations, can be found in nearly all areas of radiology, including emergency radiology, neuroradiology, nuclear medicine, image-guided interventions, and imaging-based cancer screening. Disparities in imaging-based cancer screening are especially noteworthy given the far-reaching population health impact. The social determinants of health (SDoH) play an important role in disparities in cancer screening and outcomes. Through improved understanding of how SDoH can drive differences in health outcomes in radiology, radiologists can effectively provide patient-centered, high-quality, and equitable care. Radiologists and radiology practices can become active partners in efforts to assist patients along their imaging journey and overcome existing barriers to equitable cancer screening care for traditionally marginalized populations. As radiology exists at the intersection of diagnostic imaging, image-guided diagnostic intervention, and image-guided treatment, radiologists are uniquely positioned to design these strategies. Cost-effective and socially conscious strategies that address barriers to equitable care can improve both public health and equitable health outcomes. Potential strategies include championing supportive health policy, reducing out-of-pocket costs, increasing price transparency, improving education and outreach efforts, ensuring that appropriate language translation services are available, providing individualized assistance with appointment scheduling, and offering transportation assistance and childcare. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

mHealth Interventions to Improve the Breast Cancer Continuum of Care from Prevention to Survivorship of Hispanic Women: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Hispanic women in the USA. Current interventions to improve breast cancer care include the use of mHealth, but its application in Hispanic women is limited. This scoping review aimed to describe the extent of research literature on the use of mHealth throughout the breast cancer care continuum (prevention, early detection, and treatment) in Hispanic women.

METHODS

A scoping review guided by the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework and the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review reporting protocol. Literature search of peer-reviewed research articles from 2012 to 2022 in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL® was conducted in March and June 2022.

RESULTS

Of the 10 articles selected, seven included Hispanic breast cancer survivors and three included Hispanic women at risk for developing breast cancer. Seven articles involved mobile applications and three articles used text messaging and/or cell phone voicemail. Overall, the use of mHealth for breast cancer care in Hispanics was favorable but generalizability was limited given the type of design and small samples. All interventions were tailored to Hispanic culture.

CONCLUSION

Scarcity of research on mHealth in Hispanic breast cancer care highlights healthcare disparities in this population. Evidence from this review suggests the use of mHealth to be beneficial to improving breast cancer care in Hispanics, but more research is needed involving randomized clinical trials and larger samples.

Community Health Workers to Increase Cancer Screening: 3 Community Guide Systematic Reviews

INTRODUCTION

Many in the U.S. are not up to date with cancer screening. This systematic review examined the effectiveness of interventions engaging community health workers to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

Authors identified relevant publications from previous Community Guide systematic reviews of interventions to increase cancer screening (1966 through 2013) and from an update search (January 2014-November 2021). Studies written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals were included if they assessed interventions implemented in high-income countries; reported screening for breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer; and engaged community health workers to implement part or all of the interventions. Community health workers needed to come from or have close knowledge of the intervention community.

RESULTS

The review included 76 studies. Interventions engaging community health workers increased screening use for breast (median increase=11.5 percentage points, interquartile interval=5.5‒23.5), cervical (median increase=12.8 percentage points, interquartile interval=6.4‒21.0), and colorectal cancers (median increase=10.5 percentage points, interquartile interval=4.5‒17.5). Interventions were effective whether community health workers worked alone or as part of a team. Interventions increased cancer screening independent of race or ethnicity, income, or insurance status.

DISCUSSION

Interventions engaging community health workers are recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force to increase cancer screening. These interventions are typically implemented in communities where people are underserved to improve health and can enhance health equity. Further training and financial support for community health workers should be considered to increase cancer screening uptake.

Culturally Competent Care in the Breast Imaging Clinic: Hispanic/Latino Patients

Hispanic/Latino people represent 19% of the U.S. population, and this proportion is expected to increase to 26% by 2050. Hispanic/Latino people comprise a diverse ethnic group that includes individuals from all races, religions, languages, cultural identities, and nationalities. Barriers to health care that have created significant disparities in this community include language, low socioeconomic status, and inability to afford health insurance. Health coverage for Hispanic/Latino people has been a longstanding problem in the U.S., stopping many of these patients from seeking preventive care such as screening mammography. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among Hispanic/Latino women in the U.S. and the leading cause of cancer death in this group. Five-year breast cancer survival in Hispanic/Latino women is slightly lower than that in non-Hispanic White women. Some of the factors that account for the ethnic disparities in breast cancer include lower levels of adherence to screening mammography of Hispanic/Latino women as a consequence of inadequate insurance coverage, language barriers, lack of transportation, being unable to leave work, and lack of childcare. By promoting a culturally sensitive clinical environment, breast radiologists can increase patient engagement, utilization of preventive services, treatment adherence rates, and overall health status.

Practical Approaches to Advancing Health Equity in Radiology, From the AJR Special Series on DEI

Despite significant advances in healthcare, many patients from medically underserved populations are impacted by existing healthcare disparities. Radiologists are uniquely positioned to decrease health disparities and advance health equity efforts in their practices. However, literature on practical tools for advancing radiology health equity efforts applicable to a wide variety of patient populations and care settings is lacking. Therefore, this article seeks to equip radiologists with an evidence-based and practical knowledge toolkit of health equity strategies, presented in terms of four pillars of research, clinical care, education, and innovation. For each pillar, equity efforts across diverse patient populations and radiology practice settings are examined through the lens of existing barriers, current best practices, and future directions, incorporating practical examples relevant to a spectrum of patient populations. Health equity efforts provide an opportune window to transform radiology through personalized care delivery that is responsive to diverse patient needs. Guided by compassion and empathy as core principles of health equity, leveraging the four pillars provides a helpful framework to advance health equity efforts as a step towards social justice in health.

Evaluating educational interventions to increase breast density awareness among Latinas: A randomized trial in a Federally Qualified Health Center

BACKGROUND

The objective of this randomized trial was to evaluate the short-term effect of bilingual written and interpersonal education regarding mammographic breast density (MBD).

METHODS

Latinas aged 40 to 74 years who were presenting for screening mammography were recruited and randomized 1:1:1 to receive a letter with their mammogram and MBD results (usual care [UC]), a letter plus a brochure (enhanced care [ENH]), or a letter plus a brochure and telephonic promotora education (interpersonal care [INT]). Surveys were administered at enrollment (T₀ ) and 2 weeks to 6 months after intervention delivery (T₁ ). Differences were assessed with χ² , Kruskal-Wallis, and McNemar tests and pairwise comparisons as appropriate. INT metrics and audio recordings were analyzed with descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Between October 2016 and October 2019, 943 of 1108 Latina participants (85%) completed both surveys. At T₁ , INT participants were more likely (P < .001) to report seeing their MBD results in the letter (70.2%) than UC (53.1%) or ENH participants (55.1%). The percentage of INT women who reported speaking with a provider about MBD (29.0%) was significantly greater (P < .001) than the percentage of UC (14.7%) or ENH participants (15.6%). All groups saw significant (P < .001) but nondifferential improvements in their knowledge of MBD as a masking and risk factor. In the INT group, the promotora delivered education to 77.1% of the 446 participants randomized to INT and answered questions at 28.3% of the encounters for an average of $4.70 per participant.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Latinas in a low-resource setting, MBD knowledge may increase with written or interpersonal education, but with modest investment, interpersonal education may better improve MBD awareness and prompt patient-provider discussions.

Educational Strategies to Achieve Equitable Breast Imaging Care

As the population of the United States becomes increasingly diverse, radiologists must learn to both understand and mitigate the impact of health disparities. Significant health disparities persist in radiologic care, including breast imaging. Racial and ethnic minorities, women from lower socioeconomic status, those living in rural areas, and the uninsured bear a disproportionate burden of breast cancer morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no centralized radiology curriculum focusing on breast health disparities available to residents, breast imaging fellows, or practicing breast radiologists. While patient-, provider-, and system-level initiatives are necessary to overcome disparities, our purpose is to describe educational strategies targeted to breast imaging radiologists at all levels to provide equitable care to a diverse population. These strategies may include, but are not limited to, diversifying the breast imaging workforce, understanding the needs of a diverse population, cultural sensitivity and bias training, and fostering awareness of the existing issues in screening mammography access, follow-up imaging, and clinical care.

Behavioral and psychological impact of returning breast density results to Latinas: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Background

Breast cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer mortality among Latinas. As more is learned about the association between mammographic breast density (MBD) and breast cancer risk, a number of U.S. states adopted legislation and now a federal law mandates written notification of MBD along with mammogram results. These notifications vary in content and readability, though, which may limit their effectiveness and create confusion or concern, especially among women with low health literacy or barriers to screening. The purpose of this study is to determine whether educational enhancement of MBD notification results in increased knowledge, decreased anxiety, and adherence to continued mammography screening among Latina women in a limited-resources setting.

Methods

Latinas LEarning About Density (LLEAD) is a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the impact of three notification approaches on behavioral and psychological outcomes in Latina women. Approximately 2000 Latinas undergoing screening mammography in a safety-net community clinic will be randomized 1:1:1 to mailed notification (usual care); mailed notification plus written educational materials (enhanced); or mailed notification, written educational materials, plus verbal explanation by a promotora (interpersonal). The educational materials and verbal explanations are available in Spanish or English. Mechanisms through which written or verbal information influences future screening motivation and behavior will be examined, as well as moderating factors such as depression and worry about breast cancer, which have been linked to diagnostic delays among Latinas. The study includes multiple psychological measures (anxiety, depression, knowledge about MBD, perceived risk of breast cancer, worry, self-efficacy) and behavioral outcomes (continued adherence to mammography). Measurement time points include enrollment, 2–4 weeks post-randomization, and 1 and 2 years post-randomization. Qualitative inquiry related to process and outcomes of the interpersonal arm and cost analysis related to its implementation will be undertaken to understand the intervention’s delivery and transferability.

Discussion

Legislation mandating written MBD notification may have unintended consequences on behavioral and psychological outcomes, particularly among Latinas with limited health literacy and resources. This study has implications for cancer risk communication and will offer evidence on the potential of generalizable educational strategies for delivering information on breast density to Latinas in limited-resource settings.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02910986. Registered on 21 September 2016.

Items from the WHO Trial Registration Data Set can be found in this protocol.