Search

Telephone genetic counseling (TGC) is accepted as standard clinical care for people seeking hereditary cancer risk assessment. TGC has been shown to be non-inferior to in-person genetic counseling, but trials have been conducted with a predominantly highly educated, non-Hispanic White population. This article describes the process of culturally adapting a TGC protocol and visual aid booklet for Spanish-preferring Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. The adaptation process included two phases. Phase 1 involved a review of the literature and recommendations from an expert team including community partners. Phase 2 included interviews and a pilot with the target population (n = 14) to collect feedback about the adapted protocol and booklet following steps from the Learner Verification and Revision Framework. We describe the adaptation process and report the main adaptations following the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Interventions (FRAME). Adaptations in Phase 1 were responsive to the target population needs and characteristics (e.g., delivered in Spanish at an appropriate health literacy level, addressing knowledge gaps, targeting cultural values). Phase 2 interviews were crucial to refine details (e.g., selecting words) and to add components to address GCT barriers (e.g., saliva sample video). Cultural adaptations to evidence-based TGC protocols can increase the fit and quality of care for historically underserved populations. As TGC visits become routine in clinical care, it is crucial to consider the needs of diverse communities to adequately promote equity and justice in cancer care., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2023. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Cancer health disparities remain a significant problem in the USA, compounded by lack of access to care, language barriers and systemic biases in health care. These disparities are particularly evident in areas such as genetics/genomics. For example, Latinas at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have extremely low rates of genetic counseling/testing. Long-standing barriers and inequities in access to services such as genetic counseling and testing require innovative solutions. One solution can involve training community outreach and education professionals (CORE-Ps) to bridge the gap between underserved communities and genetic specialists. We sought to develop and pilot test a training program for English-Spanish bilingual CORE-Ps to reduce disparities in access to and uptake of genetic services among Latino populations. Guided by Adult Learning Theory and with input from multiple stakeholders, we developed ÁRBOLES Familiares (Family Trees), an in-person and online training program for bilingual CORE-Ps to facilitate identification, referral, and navigation of Latinas to genetic counseling/testing. We conducted a pilot test of 24 CORE-Ps recruited from across the United States and assessed knowledge, genetic literacy, and self-efficacy at baseline and follow-up. At follow-up, participants in the pilot with complete baseline and follow-up data (N = 15) demonstrated significant improvements in HBOC knowledge, genetic literacy, self-efficacy and reports of fewer barriers to identify/navigate Latinas (ps < .05). Qualitative assessment identified ways to improve the training curriculum. Pilot results suggest ÁRBOLES is a promising approach for training CORE-Ps to identify and refer high-risk Latinas to genetic services. Next steps involve further refinement of ÁRBOLES, development of an online toolkit, and adaptation for virtual delivery., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Clinical and public health translation of genomics could be facilitated by expertise from behavioral medicine, yet genomics has not been a significant focus of the Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM). SBM convened a working group (WG) to lead a systematic exploration of members' views on: (a) whether SBM should give a higher priority to genomic translation and (b) what efforts, if any, should be made to support this increased engagement. The WG used a stepped process over 2 years that began by gaining input from SBM leadership regarding key issues and suggestions for approach, engaging a cross section of membership to expand and record these discussions, followed by systematic qualitative analyses to inform priority action steps. Discussions with SBM leaders and members suggested that genomics was relevant to SBM, particularly for junior members. SBM members' expertise in social and behavioral theory, and implementation study designs, were viewed as highly relevant to genomic translation. Participants expressed that behavioral and social scientists should be engaged in translational genomics work, giving special attention to health disparities. Proposed action steps are aligned with a "push-pull" framework of innovation dissemination. "Push" strategies aim to reach potential adopters and included linking members with genomics expertise to those wanting to become involved and raising awareness of evidence-based genomic applications ready for implementation. "Pull" strategies aim to expand demand and included developing partnerships with genomics societies and advocating for funding, study section modifications, and training programs., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Accreditation standards are at the forefront of evolving healthcare systems, setting metrics for high-quality care. Healthcare outcomes (health, experience, cost, provider satisfaction/burn out) are becoming mutual goals of the patient, provider, payer, and healthcare system. Achieving high-quality outcomes in cancer care necessitates collaboration among interdisciplinary teams of clinical providers, administrators, patient advocates, caregivers, and researchers. Dissemination and implementation science provides necessary frameworks to organize the efforts of these implementation teams, inclusive of identifying facilitators and barriers to implementation of accreditation standards. Since 2015, cancer distress screening has been mandated for continued cancer center accreditation by the American College of Surgeon's Commission on Cancer. Cancer centers have thus become real world implementation laboratories. We present the current context of distress screening, highlighting prior research and key areas of future research. We consider multiple levels of cancer care delivery and the use of interdisciplinary teams to help cancer center teams adopt, implement, and maintain efficient distress screening programs. Finally, we present a case study to identify methods for successful implementation of distress screening at one cancer center and then describe efficiencies that can be introduced using elements from human factors engineering, e- and m-health screening platforms, and community partnerships., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2018. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

There is a critical gap between the resources available to promote health and wellness after cancer and services that address these public health goals. Researchers, policy makers, healthcare providers, and community stakeholders increasingly recognize the benefits of filling this gap with trained peer mentors who can provide health-promotion services to fellow cancer survivors. This commentary addresses a mixed-method study by Pinto and colleagues that investigated the responses and experiences of trained peer mentors who delivered their telephone-based physical activity intervention for breast cancer survivors. Their findings suggested that peer mentors did not experience harms from their role while revealing that peer mentors reported benefits related to helping themselves and helping others. Drawing on our expertise in peer support provision and peer mentoring, we address the significant opportunity offered by training peer mentors to deliver behavioral interventions, draw connections to relevant literatures and theoretical perspectives on potential benefits for peer mentors, and highlight the need for rigorous, theory-based research to determine the circumstances under which peer mentoring benefits mentors and the mechanisms underlying these benefits.

Although single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) testing for disease susceptibility is commercially available, translational studies are necessary to understand how to communicate genomic information and potential implications for public health. We explored attitudes about and initial responses to genomic testing for colon cancer risk. Following development of the educational materials, we offered testing for three colon cancer SNPs in a pilot study with primary care patients. Participants completed pre- and post-test sessions and interviews. We analyzed interview transcripts with qualitative software using thematic analysis. All 20 participants opted for SNP testing. Qualitative analysis identified several themes: Motivations for SNP Testing, Before/After: Meaning of Results, Emotional Responses to SNP Results and Genomic Literacy/ Information Delivery. Results demonstrate that individuals will pursue SNP testing in the context of pre and post-test education. SNP results may influence health behaviors like healthy eating and exercise yet did not appear to impact colon cancer screening intentions.