Search

To accelerate medical breakthroughs, the All of Us Research Program aims to collect data from over one million participants. This report outlines processes used to construct the All of Us Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) survey and presents the psychometric characteristics of SDOH survey measures in All of Us. A consensus process was used to select SDOH measures, prioritizing concepts validated in diverse populations and other national cohort surveys. Survey item non-response was calculated, and Cronbachs alpha was used to analyze psychometric properties of scales. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations between demographic categories and item non-response. Twenty-nine percent (N = 117,783) of eligible All of Us participants submitted SDOH survey data for these analyses. Most scales had less than 5% incalculable scores due to item non-response. Patterns of item non-response were seen by racial identity, educational attainment, income level, survey language, and age. Internal consistency reliability was greater than 0.80 for almost all scales and most demographic groups. The SDOH survey demonstrated good to excellent reliability across several measures and within multiple populations underrepresented in biomedical research. Bias due to survey non-response and item non-response will be monitored and addressed as the survey is fielded more completely.

INTRODUCTION: To assess healthcare professionals perceptions of rural barriers and facilitators of lung cancer screening program implementation in a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) setting through a series of one-on-one interviews with healthcare team members. METHODS: Based on measures developed using Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM), we conducted a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of one-on-one semi-structured telephone interviews with VHA healthcare team members at 10 Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) between December 2020 and September 2021. An iterative inductive and deductive approach was used for qualitative analysis of interview data, resulting in the development of a conceptual model to depict rural barriers and facilitators of lung cancer screening program implementation. RESULTS: A total of 30 interviews were completed among staff, providers, and lung cancer screening program directors and a conceptual model of rural barriers and facilitators of lung cancer screening program implementation was developed. Major themes were categorized within institutional and patient environments. Within the institutional environment, participants identified systems-level (patient communication, resource availability, workload), provider-level (attitudes and beliefs, knowledge, skills and capabilities), and external (regional and national networks, incentives) barriers to and facilitators of lung cancer screening program implementation. Within the patient environment, participants revealed patient-level (modifiable vulnerabilities) barriers and facilitators as well as ecological modifiers (community) that influence screening behavior. DISCUSSION: Understanding rural barriers to and facilitators of lung cancer screening program implementation as perceived by healthcare team members points to opportunities and approaches for improving lung cancer screening reach, implementation and effectiveness in VHA rural settings.

Interest continues to be high in technology-based interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Understanding the preferences and challenges of technology use among individuals with ASD can inform the design of such interventions. Through 18 interviews with parents, we used an iterative inductive-deductive approach to qualitative analysis and explored uses of technology for social skills development among adolescents with ASD. Our findings include parents' observations about their adolescent's preferences in types of technology devices and digital content, as well as both positive and negative effects of technology use on mood and behavior. Parents highlighted several avenues of technological preferences and risks that may inform intervention design, enhance user engagement, and capitalize on users' strengths while buttressing areas for growth. [For the corresponding grantee submission, see ED622626.]

Introduction: Interfacility transfers from rural emergency departments (EDs) are an important means of access to timely and specialized care.Methods: Our goal was to identify and explore facilitators and barriers in transfer processes and their implications for emergency rural care and access. Semi-structured interviews with ED staff at five rural and two urban Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify themes and construct a conceptual framework.Results: From 81 interviews with clinical and administrative staff between March–June 2018, four themes in the interfacility transfer process emerged: 1) patient factors; 2) system resources; and 3) processes and communication for transfers, which culminate in 4) the location decision. Current and anticipated resource limitations were highly influential in transfer processes, which were described as burdensome and diverting resources from clinical care for emergency patients. Location decision was highly influenced by complexity of the transfer process, while perceived quality at the receiving location or patient preferences were not reported in interviews as being primary drivers of location decision. Transfers were described as burdensome for patients and their families. Finally, patients with mental health conditions epitomized challenges of emergency transfers.Conclusion: Interfacility transfers from rural EDs are multifaceted, resource-driven processes that require complex coordination. Anticipated resource needs and the transfer process itself are important determinants in the location decision, while quality of care or patient preferences were not reported as key determinants by interviewees. These findings identify potential benefits from tracking transfer boarding as an operational measure, directed feedback regarding outcomes of transferred patients, and simplified transfer processes.

Introduction: The hospice-in-place program at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) is available to patients and families who elect for hospice benefits and are too unstable to be transported for hospice care. The goal of this study was to assess the satisfaction of family members of patients who died while hospitalized at VUMC and received hospice-in-place compared to the families of patients who did not receive hospice care. Methods: Next-of-kin satisfaction was measured through the administration of qualitative interviews and quantitative questionnaires. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, and transcripts were analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to develop a conceptual framework. Participants were also asked to respond to a 10-question satisfaction questionnaire. Results: Forty participants were enrolled: 20 next-of-kin of patients who received hospice-in-place and 20 next-of-kin of patients who passed without hospice. Factors influencing satisfaction were organized into a conceptual framework with three categories: individual-level factors, systems-level factors, and modifying factors. For the questionnaires, the hospice-in-place group had a mean satisfaction score of 4.54 (0.76) out of five, while the non-hospice group had a mean score of 4.14 (1.00). A comparison of the two groups' responses did not show a statistically significant difference (P = 0.06). Discussion: Quantitative findings of this study showed improved satisfaction but were unable to show a significant difference in satisfaction with hospice-in-place compared to traditional care. Questionnaire results suggest that both types of care yield high satisfaction scores and are successfully supporting patients and families. The conceptual framework also adds to the understanding of end-of-life experiences at VUMC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient perspectives are essential to understand healthcare disparities such as low rates of advance care planning (ACP) among adults with limited income. We completed twenty semi-structured interviews using purposive and snowball sampling. Initial and final themes emerged from inductive inclusion of recurring codes and deductive application of the cumulative disadvantage theory. Four themes emerged: (1) structural, (2) life-stage, (3) social stressors and resources, and (4) individual stress responses and ACP readiness. ACP resources among participants included positive structural and social support and previous familial death experiences that were mitigated by stress avoidance and competing priorities. Structural resources and healthcare stressors should be addressed with policy and research to improve continuous healthcare participation and support early, comprehensive ACP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives The World Health Organization created the Age-Friendly Environment (AFE) framework to design communities that support healthy aging and equitable decision making. This framework's resource domains may account for disparately lower advance care planning (ACP) among older adults with limited incomes compared to those with high incomes. We aimed to describe and examine associations of AFE factors with ACP. Research Design and Methods We recruited and conducted cross-sectional surveys among older adults with limited incomes in 7 community-based settings in Nashville, TN. ACP and AFE item scales were dichotomized and analyzed with unadjusted phi correlation coefficients. Results Survey participants (N  = 100) included 59 women, 70 Black/African American, and 70 ≥60 years old. Most participants agreed that their community was age friendly (≥58%) and varied in ACP participation (22%–67%). Participants who perceived easy travel and service access and sufficient social isolation outreach were more likely to have had family or doctor quality-of-life discussions (phi = 0.22–0.29, p  < .05). Having a healthcare decision maker was positively associated with age-friendly travel, housing, and meet-up places (phi = 0.20–0.26, p  < .05). Discussion and Implications The AFE framework is useful for exploring the environmental factors of ACP, but further research is warranted to identify specific and immediate resources to support successful ACP among populations with socioeconomic disadvantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Despite advances in head and neck cancer control, survivors encounter significant difficulties accessing survivorship care in the USA. We conducted a qualitative study aimed to better understand their experiences and identify unmet needs. Fifteen long-term head and neck cancer survivors were interviewed, where themes around chronic emotional distress, fatigue, and disruptions in daily life emerged across the focus group. Secondary issues included sleep problems, cognitive difficulties, and other health conditions. Surprisingly, physical symptoms like pain and changes in appetite were less discussed. These findings underscore the need for tailored holistic multi-dimensional cancer survivorship programs that address physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. The study highlights the importance of increased awareness and comprehensive long-term support to prioritize and enhance quality of life for the head and neck cancer survivorship community. Improved rates of cancer control have increased the head and neck cancer survivor population. Cancer survivorship clinics are not widely available in the USA, and longitudinal supportive care for patients undergoing multimodal therapy has not advanced at a pace commensurate with improvements in cancer control. Consequently, a large head and neck cancer survivor population whose quality of life may be chronically and/or permanently diminished presently exists. This lack of awareness perpetuates under-recognition and under-investigation, leaving survivors' (mostly detrimental) experiences largely uncharted. We conducted a qualitative exploration of survivors' experiences, aiming to unpack the profound impact of late systemic symptoms on daily life, encompassing work, relationships, and self-identity in the head and neck cancer survivor community. The study included 15 remitted head and neck survivors, ≥12 months from their final treatment, who participated in semi-structured interviews conducted by a medical oncologist. Data analysis comprised qualitative thematic analysis, specifically inductive hierarchical linear modeling, enriched by a deductive approach of anecdotal clinical reporting. Results highlighted that 43.36% of all quotation material discussed in the interviews pertained to chronic emotion disturbance with significant implications for other domains of life. A central symptom cluster comprised impairments in mood/emotions, daily activity, and significant fatigue. Dysfunction in sleep, other medical conditions, and cognitive deficits comprised a secondary cluster. Physical dysfunctionality, encompassing pain, appetite, and eating, and alterations in experienced body temperature, constituted a tertiary cluster, and perhaps were surprisingly the least discussed symptom burden among head and neck cancer survivors. Symptoms causing heightened long-term survivor burden may be considered epiphenomenal to central physical dysfunctionality, albeit being presently the least represented in cancer survivor care programs. Moving forward, the development of targeted and multi-dimensional treatment programs that encompass physical, psychosocial, and spiritual domains are needed to increase clinical specificity and effective holistic long-term solutions that will foster a more compassionate and informed future of care for the cancer survivorship community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]