Search

HIV/HCV coinfected patients are a priority for direct acting antiretroviral (DAA) treatment, yet barriers to treating vulnerable patients persist. This study surveyed safety net clinic patients and providers to quantify their preferences for DAA treatment and prioritize modifiable barriers. Preferences were assessed using best-worst scaling. General linear mixed models were used to determine whether attributes differed in importance and whether patients and providers valued attributes differently. 158 HIV/HCV coinfected patients and 49 providers participated. Patients and providers had strong preferences for treatment within the medical homes where patients receive HIV care. Support such as reminders and advice numbers were also important, but were more important to providers than patients. Providers identified lack of insurance coverage for DAA as the most significant barrier. Providers rated HIV primary care providers as best suited to deliver DAA to HIV+ patients. Addressing structural barriers is essential for increasing DAA treatment in safety net settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We sought to examine the literature using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) or the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) with high-need, high-cost (HNHC) patients receiving care in urban safety net settings. Urban safety net care management programs serve low-income, racially/ethnically diverse patients living with multiple chronic conditions. Although many care management programs track patient progress with the PAM or the PEI, it is not clear whether the PAM or the PEI is an effective and appropriate tool for HNHC patients receiving care in urban safety net settings in the United States. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PsycINFO for articles published between 2004 and 2015 that used the PAM and between 1998 and 2015 that used the PEI. The search was limited to English-language articles conducted in the United States and published in peer-reviewed journals. To assess the utility of the PAM and the PEI in urban safety net care settings, we defined a HNHC patient sample as racially/ethnically diverse, low socioeconomic status (SES), and multimorbid. One hundred fourteen articles used the PAM. All articles using the PEI were conducted outside the U.S. and therefore were excluded. Nine PAM studies (8%) included participants similar to those receiving care in urban safety net settings, three of which were longitudinal. Two of the three longitudinal studies reported positive changes following interventions. Our results indicate that research on patient activation is not commonly conducted on racially and ethnically diverse, low SES, and multimorbid patients; therefore, there are few opportunities to assess the appropriateness of the PAM in such populations. Investigators expressed concerns with the potential unreliability and inappropriate nature of the PAM on multimorbid, older, and low-literacy patients. Thus, the PAM may not be able to accurately assess patient progress among HNHC patients receiving care in urban safety net settings. Assessing progress in the urban safety net care setting requires measures that account for the social and structural challenges and competing demands of HNHC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Despite the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) 2005 recommendation, few care organizations have instituted standard survivorship care plans (SCPs). Low health literacy and low English proficiency are important factors to consider in SCP development. Our study aimed to identify information needs and survivorship care plan preferences of low literacy, multi-lingual patients to support the transition from oncology to primary care and ongoing learning in survivorship. Methods: We conducted focus groups in five languages with African American, Latina, Russian, Filipina, White, and Chinese medically underserved breast cancer patients. Topics explored included the transition to primary care, access to information, knowledge of treatment history, and perspectives on SCPs. Results: Analysis of focus group data identified three themes: 1) the need for information and education on the transition between “active treatment” and “survivorship”; 2) information needed (and often not obtained) from providers; and 3) perspectives on SCP content and delivery. Conclusions: Our data point to the need to develop a process as well as written information for medically underserved breast cancer patients. An SCP document will not replace direct communication with providers about treatment, symptom management and transition, a communication that is missing in participating safety-net patients’ experiences of cancer care. Women turned to peer support and community-based organizations in the absence of information from providers. Implications for Cancer Survivors: “Clear and effective” communication of survivorship care for safety-net patients requires dedicated staff trained to address wide-ranging information needs and uncertainties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]