Giselle K. Perez

The impact of familism on physical and mental health among Hispanics in the United States

The rapidly expanding number of Hispanics living in USA has increased the need for their inclusion in research on physical and mental health. Current studies that have explored health outcomes among Hispanics have often noted an ‘epidemiological paradox’, in which there is a discrepancy between their minority status and positive health outcomes when compared with other racial/ethnic groups. Certain socio-cultural variables, in particular the value placed on family, have been largely implicated in these findings. This review will provide a summary of the literature exploring familism within the structure of the Hispanic family and its potential impact on health. We will focus on research exploring the plausible impact that family and familism values may have on the physical health (particularly within the HIV, diabetes, and breast cancer literature) and also on health behaviours of Hispanics, as well as its effect on mental health (particularly related to acculturative stress and caregiver stress). Throughout the review, we highlight some of the potential mechanisms by which familism may impact on the health status of Hispanics. We conclude the review by noting some of the clinical and ethical implications of this research, and by offering suggestions for future work in this area.

Examining Effects of Anticipated Stigma, Centrality, Salience, Internalization, and Outness on Psychological Distress for People with Concealable Stigmatized Identities

Understanding how stigmatized identities contribute to increased rates of depression and anxiety is critical to stigma reduction and mental health treatment. There has been little research testing multiple aspects of stigmatized identities simultaneously. In the current study, we collected data from a diverse, urban, adult community sample of people with a concealed stigmatized identity (CSI). We targeted 5 specific CSIs – mental illness, substance abuse, experience of domestic violence, experience of sexual assault, and experience of childhood abuse – that have been shown to put people at risk for increased psychological distress. We collected measures of the anticipation of being devalued by others if the identity became known (anticipated stigma), the level of defining oneself by the stigmatized identity (centrality), the frequency of thinking about the identity (salience), the extent of agreement with negative stereotypes about the identity (internalized stigma), and extent to which other people currently know about the identity (outness). Results showed that greater anticipated stigma, greater identity salience, and lower levels of outness each uniquely and significantly predicted variance in increased psychological distress (a composite of depression and anxiety). In examining communalities and differences across the five identities, we found that mean levels of the stigma variables differed across the identities, with people with substance abuse and mental illness reporting greater anticipated and internalized stigma. However, the prediction pattern of the variables for psychological distress was similar across the substance abuse, mental illness, domestic violence, and childhood abuse identities (but not sexual assault). Understanding which components of stigmatized identities predict distress can lead to more effective treatment for people experiencing psychological distress.

Attitudes Toward Direct-to-Consumer Advertisements and Online Genetic Testing Among High-Risk Women Participating in a Hereditary Cancer Clinic

Genetic testing for the breast cancer genes 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) has helped women determine their risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. As interest in genetic testing has grown, companies have created strategies to disseminate information about testing, including direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) and online genetic testing. This study examined attitudes toward DTCA and online testing for BRCA among 84 women at a high-risk clinic as well as additional factors that may be associated with these attitudes, such as personal and familial cancer history, cancer worry and risk perception, and history with genetic testing/counseling. Results showed that the majority of the women held favorable attitudes toward DTCA for BRCA testing but did not support online testing. Factors such as familial ovarian cancer, cancer worry, and satisfaction with genetic counseling/testing were associated with positive attitudes toward DTCA, whereas personal breast cancer history was related to negative attitudes. The findings suggest that women may view DTCA as informational but rely on physicians for help in their decision to undergo testing, and also suggest that cancer history may affect womens acceptance of DTCA and genetic testing.

Financial Burden in Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Purpose Survivors of childhood cancer may experience financial burden as a result of health care costs, particularly because these patients often require long-term medical care. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of financial burden and identify associations between a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs (≥ 10% of annual income) and issues related to financial burden (jeopardizing care or changing lifestyle) among survivors of childhood cancer and a sibling comparison group. Methods Between May 2011 and April 2012, we surveyed an age-stratified, random sample of survivors of childhood cancer and a sibling comparison group who were enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Participants reported their household income, out-of-pocket medical costs, and issues related to financial burden (questions were adapted from national surveys on financial burden). Logistic regression identified associations between participant characteristics, a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs, and financial burden, adjusting for potential confounders. Results Among 580 survivors of childhood cancer and 173 siblings, survivors of childhood cancer were more likely to have out-of-pocket medical costs ≥ 10% of annual income (10.0% v 2.9%; P < .001). Characteristics of the survivors of childhood cancer that were associated with a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket costs included hospitalization in the past year (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.9) and household income <

Racial Differences in Tobacco Cessation and Treatment Usage After Lung Screening: An Examination of the National Lung Screening Trial

50,000 (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 2.4 to 12.8). Among survivors of childhood cancer, a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs was significantly associated with problems paying medical bills (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 4.4 to 18.0); deferring care for a medical problem (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.6 to 5.9); skipping a test, treatment, or follow-up (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.0); and thoughts of filing for bankruptcy (OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 3.0 to 14.3). Conclusion Survivors of childhood cancer are more likely to report spending a higher percentage of their income on out-of-pocket medical costs, which may influence their health-seeking behavior and potentially affect health outcomes. Our findings highlight the need to address financial burden in this population with long-term health care needs.

Integrating tobacco treatment into cancer care: Study protocol for a randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND Black smokers have demonstrated greater lung cancer disease burden and poorer smoking cessation outcomes compared with whites. Lung cancer screening represents a unique opportunity to promote cessation among smokers; however, little is known about the differential impact of screening on smoking behaviors among black and white smokers. Using data from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), we examined the racial differences in smoking behaviors after screening. METHODS We examined racial differences in smoking behavior and cessation activity among 6,316 white and 497 black (median age, 60 and 59 years, respectively) NLST participants who were current smokers at screening using a follow-up survey on 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts, 6-month continuous abstinence, and the use of smoking cessation programs and aids at 12 months after screening. Using multiple regression analyses, we examined the predictors of 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts and 6-month continuous abstinence. RESULTS At 12 months after screening, blacks were more likely to report a 24-hour (52.7% vs. 41.2%, p < .0001) or 7-day (33.6% vs. 27.2%, p = .002) quit attempt. However, no significant racial differences were found in 6-month continuous abstinence (5.6% blacks vs. 7.2% whites). In multiple regression, black race was predictive of a higher likelihood of a 24-hour (odds ratio [OR], 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.0) and 7-day (OR, 1.5, 95% CI, 1.1-1.8) quit attempt; however, race was not associated with 6-month continuous abstinence. Only a positive screening result for lung cancer was significantly predictive of successful 6-month continuous abstinence (OR, 2.3, 95% CI, 1.8-2.9). CONCLUSION Although blacks were more likely than whites to have 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts, the rates of 6-month continuous abstinence did not differ. Targeted interventions are needed at the time of lung cancer screening to promote abstinence among all smokers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Among smokers undergoing screening for lung cancer, blacks were more likely than whites to have 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts; however, these attempts did not translate to increased rates of 6-month continuous abstinence among black smokers. Targeted interventions are needed at the time of lung cancer screening to convert quit attempts to sustained smoking cessation among all smokers.

“Job Lock” Among Long-term Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

BACKGROUND Despite the well-established risks of persistent smoking, 10-30% of cancer patients continue to smoke after diagnosis. Evidence-based tobacco treatment has yet to be integrated into routine oncology care. This paper describes the protocol, manualized treatment, evaluation plan, and overall study design of comparing the effectiveness and cost of two treatments across two major cancer centers. METHODS/DESIGN A two-arm, two-site randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial is testing the hypothesis that an Intensive Treatment (IT) intervention is more effective than a Standard Treatment (ST) intervention in helping recently diagnosed cancer patients quit smoking. Both interventions include 4 weekly counseling sessions and FDA-approved smoking cessation medication advice. The IT includes an additional 4 biweekly and 3 monthly booster sessions as well as dispensal of the recommended FDA-approved smoking cessation medication at no cost. The trial is enrolling patients with suspected or newly diagnosed cancer who have smoked a cigarette in the past 30days. Participants are randomly assigned to receive the ST or IT condition. Tobacco cessation outcomes are assessed at 3 and 6months. The primary study outcome is 7-day point prevalence biochemically-validated tobacco abstinence. Secondary study outcomes include the incremental cost-effectiveness of the IT vs. ST. DISCUSSION This trial will answer key questions about delivering tobacco treatment interventions to newly diagnosed cancer patients. If found to be efficacious and cost-effective, this treatment will serve as a model to be integrated into oncology care settings nation-wide, as we strive to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life for cancer patients.

Promoting quality care in patients with cancer with limited English proficiency: perspectives of medical interpreters

Importance Childhood cancer survivors may be reluctant to make changes in their employment because of access to health insurance. Objective To examine the prevalence of “job lock” (staying at a job to keep work-related health insurance) in a sample drawn from an established, multi-institutional cohort of full-time employed childhood cancer survivors compared with a random sample of siblings and to explore factors associated with job lock among cancer survivors. Design, Setting, and Participants Cross-sectional survey of full-time employed adult survivors of childhood cancer and a random sample of siblings derived from a cohort of 25 US pediatric oncology centers. Exposures Data collection included sociodemographic factors, insurance coverage, chronic medical conditions, and treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures Self-report of job lock and factors associated with job lock. Results Among the 522 participants, 394 were cancer survivors (54.5% male) and 128 were siblings (51.5% male). Job lock was reported by 23.2% (95% CI, 18.9%-28.1%) of survivors, compared with 16.9% (95% CI, 11.1%-25.0%) of siblings (P = .16). Job lock was more common among survivors reporting previous health insurance denial (relative risk [RR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.03-2.52) and problems paying medical bills (RR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.56-3.80). Among survivors, being female (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.11-2.59; P = .01) and having a severe, disabling, or life-threatening health condition (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09-2.69; P = .02) were associated with job lock. Conclusions and Relevance Job lock is common among long-term childhood cancer survivors who are employed full-time. A survivor’s decision to remain employed at a job in order to maintain health insurance coverage may affect career trajectory, diminish potential earning power, and ultimately impact quality of life.

Promoting quality care in cancer patients with Limited English Proficiency: Perspectives of medical interpreters.

Individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) are a growing population [1]. Patients with LEP are at high risk for lower quality care, including higher rates of misdiagnoses, medical errors, and serious adverse events [2–4]. Language barriers and underuse of medical interpreters have been widely identified as obstacles to equitable and quality care [2,4]; however, the rate of professional interpreter use remains unknown. Further, no known study has explored patients’ reasons for refusing interpreter assistance, rather, existing studies have largely focused on physician and parental barriers [3]. Patients with LEP diagnosed with cancer may be particularly susceptible to adverse outcomes as a result of communication barriers. Conversations in cancer care often involve complex, confusing, and emotionally laden discussions. In fact, English proficient patients have been shown to have difficulty understanding cancerrelated discussions yet are reluctant to ask questions [5]. In effect, poor communication in cancer care may exacerbate a patient’s feelings of helplessness and distrust, which may manifest in treatment nonadherence and care dissatisfaction. Although language barriers have been shown to impact care delivery among populations with LEP, little is known about additional factors that may influence the provision of quality care for patients with LEP and cancer, particularly from the perspective of medical interpreters. Medical interpreters are trained specialists who bridge communication between a patient and their provider. Given their position as medical liaison and cultural broker, interpreters offer a unique outlook of patient experiences that can inform and equip cancer centers with tools to manage the complexities of a linguistically and culturally diverse medical population. Given their distinct position, a number of studies led by Hsieh and colleagues have qualitatively explored interpreters’ perspectives by tapping into their personal challenges and experiences with navigating their role as cultural advocate and medical conduit, particularly as it relates to care delivery [6,7]. However, this is one of the first studies to specifically explore professional interpreters’ perceptions of the potential mechanisms underlying disparities in the care of patients with LEP and cancer. Moreover, this is among the first studies to solicit interpreters’ recommendations for improving cancer care for patients with LEP. As such, this study aims to understand interpreters’ perceptions of factors that impact the quality of cancer care receipt. Secondary aims include exploring interpreters’ recommendations for improving overall cancer care delivery for patients with LEP.

A brief information-motivation-behavioral skills intervention to promote human papillomavirus vaccination among college-aged women.

Individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) are a growing population [1]. Patients with LEP are at high risk for lower quality care, including higher rates of misdiagnoses, medical errors, and serious adverse events [2–4]. Language barriers and underuse of medical interpreters have been widely identified as obstacles to equitable and quality care [2,4]; however, the rate of professional interpreter use remains unknown. Further, no known study has explored patients’ reasons for refusing interpreter assistance, rather, existing studies have largely focused on physician and parental barriers [3]. Patients with LEP diagnosed with cancer may be particularly susceptible to adverse outcomes as a result of communication barriers. Conversations in cancer care often involve complex, confusing, and emotionally laden discussions. In fact, English proficient patients have been shown to have difficulty understanding cancerrelated discussions yet are reluctant to ask questions [5]. In effect, poor communication in cancer care may exacerbate a patient’s feelings of helplessness and distrust, which may manifest in treatment nonadherence and care dissatisfaction. Although language barriers have been shown to impact care delivery among populations with LEP, little is known about additional factors that may influence the provision of quality care for patients with LEP and cancer, particularly from the perspective of medical interpreters. Medical interpreters are trained specialists who bridge communication between a patient and their provider. Given their position as medical liaison and cultural broker, interpreters offer a unique outlook of patient experiences that can inform and equip cancer centers with tools to manage the complexities of a linguistically and culturally diverse medical population. Given their distinct position, a number of studies led by Hsieh and colleagues have qualitatively explored interpreters’ perspectives by tapping into their personal challenges and experiences with navigating their role as cultural advocate and medical conduit, particularly as it relates to care delivery [6,7]. However, this is one of the first studies to specifically explore professional interpreters’ perceptions of the potential mechanisms underlying disparities in the care of patients with LEP and cancer. Moreover, this is among the first studies to solicit interpreters’ recommendations for improving cancer care for patients with LEP. As such, this study aims to understand interpreters’ perceptions of factors that impact the quality of cancer care receipt. Secondary aims include exploring interpreters’ recommendations for improving overall cancer care delivery for patients with LEP.