For Hispanic/Latino MSM (HLMSM) in the South, HIV burden remains high, and HIV elimination is a national priority. Between July and September 2016, using a strengths-based approach informed by resilience theory, we conducted qualitative interviews with HIV-negative HLMSM in five southern cities in the United States with elevated HIV prevalence. We analyzed data using a qualitative content analysis approach, assessing for interrater reliability. A brief behavioral survey was also conducted. We enrolled 51 HLMSM (mean age = 33 years, range = 15-63). HLMSM discussed the climate of fear about HIV and homosexuality impeding HIV prevention, including the impact of stigma and taboo. Three main strengths-based strategies emerged for preventing HIV: assessing partner risk, establishing boundaries for sexual interactions, and self-education. Future HIV prevention efforts may benefit from balancing risk-based approaches with those that emphasize resilience, address partner trustworthiness and safety, and focus on providing novel outlets for HIV prevention education.

Data to Care (D2C) uses US public health surveillance data to identify persons with diagnosed HIV who are not receiving adequate medical care. These persons are linked to care and ancillary social services through personalized outreach. We conducted semistructured interviews with 36 adults with HIV in Louisiana who were engaged for the first time or reengaged back into HIV care through D2C efforts. Before D2C program staff contact, nearly 40% were not contemplating HIV care. Program clients cited barriers to HIV care, including difficulties with appointment scheduling and transportation, health care service and drug costs, low motivation, and competing non-HIV health needs. Thirty-four of the 36 clients said that D2C staff helped them overcome these barriers. Clients also described psychosocial support from D2C staff. After receiving D2C program assistance, more than 90% of clients reported consistently receiving HIV medical care and taking medications. Our findings suggest that D2C staff successfully identified client needs and provided tailored assistance.

Data-to-Care (D2C) is a public health strategy designed to engage out-of-care (OOC) persons with HIV (PWH) in HIV care. OOC PWH are identified through review of state and local HIV data and engaged in care through individualized efforts that address barriers to HIV care. Perspectives of D2C program staff can contribute to D2C program development and sustainability. We conducted semi-structured interviews in 2017 with 20 D2C program staff from Louisiana (n = 10) and Virginia (n = 10), states with distinct D2C programs. We used content and thematic analysis to analyze interview transcripts. In both states, common barriers to care for OOC PWH include limited transportation, stigma, substance use, poverty, homelessness, and mental illness. To address these barriers and engage OOC clients in HIV care, staff and programs provided transportation vouchers and housing assistance, integrated substance use and mental health services into care engagement processes, provided empathy and compassion, and assessed and addressed basic unmet needs. Identifying and addressing social and structural barriers to HIV care is a critical and often a necessary first step in engaging OOC clients in HIV care. These findings can be used for D2C program design and implementation, facilitating engagement in HIV care for OOC PWH.

INTRODUCTION: People who inject drugs (PWID) are disproportionately affected by HIV in the United States, and HIV prevention and care services may be inaccessible to or underutilized by PWID. In 2018, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) investigated an increase in HIV diagnoses primarily among unstably housed PWID in Lawrence and Lowell. METHODS: The response team interviewed 34 PWID in Lawrence and Lowell, with and without HIV, to inform effective response strategies. Qualitative interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using a thematic analysis approach structured around pre-designated research questions related to service engagement (including harm reduction services, substance use disorder treatment, medical services, shelters, and other community services), unmet needs, and knowledge gaps regarding HIV prevention. RESULTS: Participants ranged in age from 20 to 54 years (median: 32); 21 of the 34 participants (62%) were male, and 21 were non-Hispanic white. Fifteen (44%) self-reported being HIV positive. All 34 participants had experienced homelessness in the past 12 months, and 29 (85%) had ever received services at syringe service programs (SSP). We identified five key themes: substance use as a barrier to accessing health and social services; experiences of trauma and mental illness as factors impacting substance use and utilization of services; unstable housing as a barrier to accessing services; negative perceptions of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD); and the desire to be treated with dignity and respect by others. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need for well-resourced and integrated or linked service provision for PWID, which includes mental health services, housing, MOUD, harm reduction, and infectious disease prevention and care services. Co-locating and integrating low-barrier services at trusted community locations, such as SSPs, could increase service engagement and improve health outcomes for PWID. Further implementation science research may aid the development of effective strategies for services for PWID and build trusting relationships between service providers and PWID.

Among persons with HIV (PWH), homelessness is associated with poorer health. From 2009 to 2014, national HIV prevention goals included a reduction in homelessness among PWH. We sought to examine social ecological factors associated with homelessness among PWH at a sub-national level during that period. National data identified Delaware as the only jurisdiction where homelessness among PWH declined from 2009 to 2014. We analyzed population-level indicators and conducted telephone interviews with 6 key stakeholders to further examine this trend. Overall homelessness, household poverty, and median housing price were associated with homelessness among PWH in Delaware. Key stakeholders highlighted centralized services as program strengths, and pointed to common challenges, e.g., long wait lists, limited availability of units, and complex procedures. In addition to broader social and economic factors, coordinated program strategies may improve housing outcomes for PWH. Monitoring trends at sub-national levels can help identify successful approaches as well as ongoing challenges. © This work was authored as part of the Contributor’s official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 USC. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under US Law.

Patient navigation is a promising strategy for improving health among persons with multiple barriers to HIV care, yet little is known about navigation's core components. From 24 systematically identified navigation studies, we abstracted navigators' activities, grouped activities into 20 thematic activity categories, and ordered them by frequency. Subsequently, Principal Components Analysis of activity categories was used identify independent clusters. Accompaniment characterized 71% of navigation programs; ≥ half included health education (58%), collaboration/coordination (58%), linkage-to-care (54%), transportation support (54%), service referrals (50%) and instrumental support (50%). Five unique components (comprising 13 activity categories) were identified: (1) services beyond office, (2) health education and relationship building, (3) accompaniment and instrumental support, (4) locating patients and tracking information, and (5) beyond HIV care. Navigators who located patients or tracked information were less likely to provide accompaniment or instrumental support (r = - 0.60, p = 0.002). Findings can enhance precision in developing, describing, evaluating and improving navigation programs.

Patient navigation is increasingly used to link and (re)engage persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to care. A more holistic understanding of patient navigation can be achieved by exploring the experiences of navigators, the persons who comprise half of the navigation process. We conducted a meta-synthesis of navigator experiences with HIV patient navigation using a phenomenological approach. We identified nine relevant studies. Data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. Analysis identified two overarching themes relating to (1) the breadth and depth of bidirectional relationships and functional activities that navigators undertake to connect their clients to care and (2) the inherently personal experience of delivering navigation services. From these thematic findings, we recommend that HIV patient navigators exhibit capacity and expertise in developing and maintaining interpersonal relationships with clients and health care systems/providers and develop self-care practices and emotional boundaries with clients. Our review seeks to advance public health research and practice by articulating key experiences and perspectives of HIV patient navigators, drawing findings and recommendations applicable to the development, implementation, and evaluation of HIV patient navigation.

Patient navigation is increasingly utilized to link and (re)engage persons with HIV to care. Understanding client experiences with HIV patient navigation can facilitate intervention design and translation of evidence to practice. We conducted a qualitative meta-synthesis of client experiences with HIV patient navigation. Data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. We identified seven relevant studies; all collected data via in-depth interviews with persons with HIV who participated in HIV patient navigation. Four interrelated themes emerged from analysis that pertain to (1) the complexity of the health and social service environment and the holistic approaches taken by the navigator, (2) the profound significance of the client-navigator relationship, (3) client reluctance to end the navigation program, and (4) client self-efficacy and feelings of hope and psychological change as a result of their navigation experience. The unifying theme across all studies was the value and impact of the client-navigator relationship on client experience and quality of life. Programs should consider hiring navigators who possess strong relational skills and are peers of the clients, and clearly delineating the role of the navigator. Research should examine the impact of the client-navigator relationship on client outcomes and further investigate how participating in patient navigation affects client self-efficacy, client resiliency, and the role of posttraumatic growth to achieve improved HIV outcomes. This review underscores the significance of the relationship within intensive, multilevel interventions for individuals and communities marginalized and isolated from health and social service systems.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the first systematic review on the associations between HIV patient navigation and HIV care continuum outcomes (i.e., linkage to care, retention in care, ART uptake, medication adherence, and viral suppression) in the United States (U.S.). We identified primary research studies that addressed these associations and qualitatively assessed whether provision of patient navigation was positively associated with these outcomes, including strength of the evidence. METHODS: A systematic review, including both electronic (MEDLINE [OVID], EMBASE [OVID], PsycINFO [OVID], and CINAHL [EBSCOhost]) online databases and manual searches, was conducted to locate studies published from January 1, 1996 through April 23, 2018. RESULTS: Twenty studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 17 found positive associations. Patient navigation was more likely to be positively associated with linkage to care (5 of 6 studies that assessed this association), retention in care (10 of 11), and viral suppression (11 of 15) than with antiretroviral (ART) uptake (1 of 4) or ART adherence (2 of 4). However, almost two-thirds of the 17 studies were of weak study quality, and only three used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that patient navigation is a potentially effective strategy to enhance engagement in care among persons with HIV (PWH). However encouraging, the evidence is still weak. Studies with more rigorous methodological designs, and research examining characteristics of navigators or navigational programs associated with better outcomes, are warranted given the current interest and use of this strategy.

Introduction: In the United States, disparities in cancer screening, morbidity, and mortality are well documented, and often are related to race/ethnicity and socioeconomic indicators including income, education, and healthcare access. Public health approaches that address social determinants of health have the greatest potential public health benefit, and can positively impact health disparities. As public health interventions, community health workers (CHWs), and patient navigators (PNs) work to address disparities and improve cancer outcomes through education, connecting patients to and navigating them through the healthcare system, supporting patient adherence to screening and diagnostic services, and providing social support and linkages to financial and community resources. Clinical settings, such as federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are mandated to provide care to medically underserved communities, and thus are also valuable in the effort to address health disparities. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies of cancer-related CHW/PN interventions in FQHCs, and to describe the components and characteristics of those interventions in order to guide future intervention development and evaluation. Method: We searched five databases for peer-reviewed CHW/PN intervention studies conducted in partnership with FQHCs with a focus on cancer, carried out in the United States, and published in English between January 1990 and December 2013. Results: We identified 24 articles, all reporting positive outcomes of CHW/PNs interventions in FQHCs. CHW/PN interventions most commonly promoted breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening and/or referral for diagnostic resolution. Studies were supported largely through federal funding. Partnerships with academic institutions and community-based organizations provided support and helped develop capacity among FQHC clinic leadership and community members. Discussion: Both the FQHC system and CHW/PNs were borne from the need to address persistent, complex health disparities among medically underserved communities. Our findings support the effectiveness of CHW/PN programs to improve completion and timeliness of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in FQHCs, and highlight intervention components useful to design and sustainability.

BACKGROUND: Current cervical cancer screening guidelines include the option of lengthening the screening interval to 5 years for average-risk women aged 30-65 years when screened with Pap and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-test). Because many providers are reluctant to extend screening intervals, we launched an educational intervention to promote recommended screening practices. The study objective was to assess changes in provider attitudes and beliefs to extending screening intervals among low-income women. METHODS: The study was conducted in 15 clinics in Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois. Providers in the intervention arm received a multicomponent educational intervention. Fifty-six providers (n = 29 intervention and n = 27 control) completed baseline and 12-month follow-up surveys assessing beliefs and intentions about extending screening intervals. RESULTS: The 12-month assessment showed providers in the intervention arm were significantly more likely than those in the control arm to recommend a 3-year screening interval (guideline recommendation at time of study) with a normal co-test result. Providers who received the intervention were significantly more likely to agree that routine co-testing is the best way to screen for cervical cancer, that extending the screening interval would be good, easy, and beneficial, and to disagree that the increased screening interval would cause patients to lose contact with the medical system. CONCLUSION: Educating providers on the natural history of HPV infection and cervical cancer and the benefits of extended intervals increased their willingness to follow guidelines. This study provides evidence that an educational intervention delivered with HPV testing materials may be effective in encouraging appropriate cervical screening intervals.

INTRODUCTION: Women have been reluctant to adopt longer than annual intervals for cervical cancer screening, despite guidelines recommending screening every 3 to 5 years. Our study assessed patient knowledge and beliefs about human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer screening after exposure to an educational intervention, and whether there was a change in time regarding knowledge and beliefs among all study participants in an underserved population. METHOD: The study was conducted in 15 clinics associated with 6 Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois, USA. Cervical cancer screening patients (n = 644) completed a baseline and postintervention follow-up survey. The intervention included an HPV test and an educational pamphlet. Significance testing of changes in knowledge and beliefs was conducted with multilevel, mixed-effects models adjusting for repeated measures of patients and clustering within clinics. RESULTS: No significant differences in study outcomes were found between the intervention and control groups. Among all women, knowledge of HPV significantly improved over time. At follow-up, fewer women reported that having a co-test is good, wise, will give you peace of mind, will tell you whether you need to worry if Pap is abnormal, is something your doctor thinks you should have, and will give you the best care available. More women said it would be bad, useless, or worrying to wait 3 years for a Pap test at follow-up. CONCLUSION: HPV knowledge improved over time, but the educational intervention utilized in this study was not successful in improving attitudes and beliefs about co-testing and longer screening intervals, and beliefs about HPV co-testing and 3-year screening intervals were less favorable. Having health care providers discuss the consequences of overscreening and the natural history of HPV and cervical cancer with their patients may help increase adherence to longer screening intervals. Further examination of the essential components for educational intervention in this population is warranted.

Reasons for racial/ethnic disparities in HPV infection are unclear. This study assessed racial/ethnic differences in and risk factors for HPV positivity among low-income women. Data were collected from 984 low-income women visiting Federally Qualified Health Centers across Illinois (2009-2011). Logistic regression analyses were used to examine associations with HPV positivity. Our results showed Mexican-born Hispanics had the lowest HPV positivity (16%), followed by non-Hispanic whites (29%), US-born Hispanics (35%), and non-Hispanic blacks (39%). Mexican-born Hispanics reported fewer risk behaviors for HPV positivity, including first sexual intercourse before age 16years (9% versus 27%), multiple sexual partners in lifetime (48% versus 90%), and current cigarette smoking status (10% versus 35%) when compared to non-Hispanic whites (p<0.001). In multivariate-adjusted logistic regression, being non-Hispanic black, first sexual intercourse before age 16 years, increasing numbers of recent or lifetime sexual partners and current cigarette smoking status were associated with a higher likelihood of HPV positivity. Our findings highlight racial/ethnic differences in HPV positivity and risk factors in a population of women with similar socioeconomic characteristics. When measuring HPV risk factors within the Hispanic population, foreign-born status and other mediating factors, such as social norms and cultural characteristics, may be relevant to assess the intragroup heterogeneity.

BACKGROUND: Among providers who serve low-income and uninsured women, resistance to extending the cervical cancer screening interval following normal Pap and co-test results has been documented. Our objective was to examine provider characteristics and beliefs associated with guideline-consistent screening interval recommendations. METHOD: We collected cross-sectional survey data between 2009 and 2010 from 82 primary care providers in six Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois, USA. The relationships between characteristics, beliefs, and screening interval recommendations (1. year vs. 3. years) were tested with Pearson chi-square, negative binomial and ordered logistic regression. RESULTS: Compared to providers who recommended annual intervals after a normal co-test, providers who recommended a guideline-consistent (i.e., 3. years) screening interval were significantly more likely to report the goodness, ease, and benefit of their recommendation and perceived encouragement for a 3-year interval from professional organizations and journals (p < .05). Providers who recommended a 3-year interval were also less likely to report that longer intervals increase patient risk for cervical cancer (p < .05). Interval recommendations were not associated with provider specialty, gender, or years in practice. CONCLUSION: Messages that promote the benefits of longer screening intervals after a normal co-test, the natural history of human papillomavirus and cervical cancer, and low risk of developing cancer with a longer interval may be useful to promote evidence-based screening in this population of Federally Qualified Health Center providers. Dissemination of targeted messages through professional journals and specialty organizations should be considered.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the information providers share with patients when ordering a co-test, or combined human papillomavirus (HPV) and Papanicolaou (Pap) test, for cervical cancer screening. We assessed provider perceptions of such communication practices with female patients aged 30-60. years. METHODS: We analyzed data from 98 providers in 15 Federally Qualified Health Center clinics across Illinois (2009-2010). RESULTS: About 70% of the providers reported that when ordering a co-test, they would usually or always communicate information about the HPV test to their patients, explain the test detects a sexually transmitted infection, and discuss how the test results may determine their next screening interval. Most (> 85%) reported that they were comfortable discussing co-test results. Compared with concordant positive results (HPV positive/Pap positive), providers were more likely to perceive that discordant results (HPV positive/Pap negative) would be too complex for patients to understand (25% vs. 15%, p = 0.006), and make patients feel less assured that they were getting the best standard of care (67% vs. 88%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: As HPV testing plays a more prominent role in cervical cancer screening, more attention should be given to communications between providers and patients about the benefits and harms of different screening options.

AIMS: To understand how US cancer control plans address alcohol use, an important but frequently overlooked cancer risk factor, and how many US adults are at risk. METHODS: We reviewed alcohol control efforts in 69 comprehensive cancer control plans in US states, tribes and jurisdictions. Using the 2011 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed the prevalence of current alcohol use among US adults and the proportion of these drinkers who exceeded guidelines for moderate drinking. RESULTS: Most comprehensive cancer control plans acknowledged alcohol use as a cancer risk factor but fewer than half included a goal, objective or strategy to address alcohol use. More than half of US adults reported current alcohol use in 2011, and two of three drinkers exceeded moderate drinking guidelines at least once in the past month. Many states that did not address alcohol use in comprehensive cancer control plans also had a high proportion of adults at risk. CONCLUSION: Alcohol use is a common cancer risk factor in the USA, but alcohol control strategies are not commonly included in comprehensive cancer control plans. Supporting the implementation of evidence-based strategies to prevent the excessive use of alcohol is one tool the cancer control community can use to reduce the risk of cancer.

BACKGROUND: Since 2003, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against Pap testing for women without a cervix following a hysterectomy and those aged >65 years. Few population-based studies have investigated factors associated with overuse of Pap testing in the U.S. PURPOSE: To evaluate patient characteristics associated with overuse of Pap testing. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for women aged ≥30 years. NHIS is a nationally representative survey that employs a random, stratified, multi-stage cluster sampling design. In 2010, the NHIS administered a Cancer Control Supplement with questions on cervical cancer screening and hysterectomy status. Conducted in 2011-2013, all analyses account for the stratification and clustering of data within the complex NHIS survey design. Multivariate logistic regression models were used in all analyses. RESULTS: Among women who have undergone a hysterectomy, younger age, Hispanic and black race/ethnicity, exceeding 400% of poverty level, and private health insurance coverage were significantly associated with receipt of a recent Pap test since hysterectomy. Among women aged >65 years, non-Hispanic white ethnicity, higher education level, exceeding 400% of poverty level, and no hysterectomy were significantly associated with receipt of a recent Pap test. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted efforts to reduce unnecessary testing among older women and women with a hysterectomy in compliance with clinical recommendations for cervical cancer prevention are needed. Specific attention should be paid to privately insured women with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty level.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are safety-net clinics that provide cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to medically underserved women, some of whom may be at risk for developing cervical cancer. National guidelines recommend against using screening test results or sexual history to determine vaccine eligibility. Documenting HPV vaccine recommendations and beliefs of primary care providers in FQHCs may aid in promoting evidence-based practices and prioritizing health interventions for vulnerable populations. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, we collected data from 98 primary care providers in 15 FQHC clinics in IL, USA using a cross-sectional survey. Questions assessed provider and practice characteristics, HPV vaccine recommendations, and provider's belief about whether their screening and management procedures would change for women who were vaccinated. RESULTS: 93% of providers recommended the HPV vaccine, most frequently for females aged 13-26 years (98%). Some providers reported sometimes to always using HPV test results (12%), Pap test results (7%), and number of sexual partners (33%) to determine vaccine eligibility. More than half of providers (55%) reported they will not change their screening and management practices for vaccinated females, yet believe vaccination will yield fewer abnormal Pap tests (71%) and referrals for colposcopy (74%). CONCLUSION: Study providers routinely recommended the HPV vaccine for their patients. However, providers made fewer recommendations to vaccinate females ages 9-12 years (which includes the target age for vaccination) compared to older females, and used pre-vaccination assessments not recommended by U.S. guidelines, such as screening test results and number of sexual partners. In order to maximize the public health benefit of the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, adherence to guidelines is necessary, especially in settings that provide care to medically underserved women.

Special events such as health fairs, cultural festivals and charity runs are commonly employed in the community to increase cancer screening; however, little is known about their effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to assess the activities, screening outcomes, barriers and recommendations of special events to increase breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. In-depth interviews were conducted nationally with 51 coordinators of events in June to September 2012. Health fairs and screening days were the most common events conducted, primarily for breast cancer education. Goals were to increase awareness of cancer screening and reach special populations. Evidence-based Community Guide strategies to increase cancer screening employed were: small media, reducing structural barriers, one-on-one education or group education. For each event that provided screening on-site or through referral, a mean of 35 breast, 28 cervical and 19 colorectal cancer screenings were reported. Coordinators made recommendations for further evaluation of special events, and most plan to conduct another special event. These data are novel and provide baseline documentation of activities and recommendations for a commonly used community-based cancer screening intervention that lacks evidence of effectiveness. Additional research to better understand the use of special events for increasing cancer screening is warranted.

BACKGROUND: Special events are common community-based strategies for health promotion. This paper presents findings from a systematic literature review on the impact of special events to promote breast, cervical or colorectal cancer education and screening. METHODS: Articles in English that focused on special events involving breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer conducted in the U.S. and published between January 1990 and December 2011 were identified from seven databases: Ovid, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstract, Cochrane Libraries, and EconLit. Study inclusion and data extraction were independently validated by two researchers. RESULTS: Of the 20 articles selected for screening out of 1,409, ten articles on special events reported outcome data. Five types of special events were found: health fairs, parties, cultural events, special days, and plays. Many focused on breast cancer only, or in combination with other cancers. Reach ranged from 50-1732 participants. All special events used at least one evidence-based strategy suggested by the Community Guide to Preventive Services, such as small media, one-on-one education, and reducing structural barriers. For cancer screening as an outcome of the events, mammography screening rates ranged from 4.8% to 88%, Pap testing was 3.9%, and clinical breast exams ranged from 9.1% to 100%. For colorectal screening, FOBT ranged from 29.4% to 76%, and sigmoidoscopy was 100% at one event. Outcome measures included intentions to get screened, scheduled appointments, uptake of clinical exams, and participation in cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Special events found in the review varied and used evidence-based strategies. Screening data suggest that some special events can lead to increases in cancer screening, especially if they provide onsite screening services. However, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that special events are effective in increasing cancer screening. The heterogeneity of populations served, event activities, outcome variables assessed, and the reliance on self-report to measure screening limit conclusions. This study highlights the need for further research to determine the effectiveness of special events to increase cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality in nearly all U.S. Affiliated Pacific Island Jurisdictions (USAPIJ); however, most jurisdictions are financially and geographically limited in their capacity to deliver routine screening. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 72 health care providers from five of the six USAPIJ in 2011 to assess knowledge, beliefs, practices, and perceived barriers regarding routine cervical cancer screening. We compared the responses of providers from jurisdictions that were funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) with those that were not funded. RESULTS: Most providers reported cervical cancer prevention as a priority in their clinical practices (90.3%) and use the Papanicolaou test for screening (86.1%). Many providers reported knowledge of screening guidelines (76.4%); however, more than half reported that annual screening is most effective (56.9%). Providers in non-NBCCEDP-funded jurisdictions reported greater acceptance of visual inspection with acetic acid (93.9%) and self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing (48.5%) compared with NBCCEDP-funded jurisdictions (15.4% and 30.8% respectively). Providers from non-NBCCEDP-funded jurisdictions reported inadequate technological resources for screening women (42.4%), and approximately 25% of providers in both groups believed that screening was cost-prohibitive. CONCLUSION: Although cervical cancer screening is a priority in clinical practice, beliefs about annual screening, costs associated with screening, and varying levels of support for alternative screening tests pose barriers to providers throughout the USAPIJ. Further exploration of using evidence-based, lower cost, and sustainable screening technologies is warranted in addition to emphasizing timely follow-up of all positive cases.

BACKGROUND: The recommended screening interval when using the Papanicolaou (Pap) and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-testing) is 5 years. However because providers are reluctant to extend the screening interval, we launched a study to identify barriers to appropriate use of the co-test and to implement an educational intervention to promote evidence-based screening practices. This article provides an overview of the study including the multi-component intervention and participant demographics. METHODS: The study was conducted in 15 clinics associated with 6 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Illinois. Each clinic received HPV tests to administer with routine Pap tests among enrolled patients (n=2,246) and was assigned to a study arm: intervention arm (n=7) received a multi-component educational intervention (small media, academic detailing, and website) for providers and printed educational materials for patients, and control arm (n=8) received printed copies of general guidelines. Clinic coordinators (n=15), providers (n=98), and patients (n=984) completed baseline surveys to assess screening practices. RESULTS: Providers reported an average age of 41.3 years and were predominately female, non-Hispanic, and white. Patients reported an average age of 45.0 years and nearly two-thirds were Hispanic or black. Of the 2,246 patients, 89% had a normal co-test. Lessons learned from the study included the importance of buy-in at a high level in the organization, a champion provider, and a clinical coordinator devoted to the study. CONCLUSION: Materials from this study can be adapted to educate providers and patients on appropriate use of the co-test and encourage extended screening intervals as a safe and effective practice.

IMPORTANCE: Since licensure of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in 2006, HPV vaccine coverage among US adolescents has increased but remains low compared with other recommended vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on barriers to HPV vaccination among US adolescents to inform future efforts to increase HPV vaccine coverage. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched PubMed and previous review articles to identify original research articles describing barriers to HPV vaccine initiation and completion among US adolescents. Only articles reporting data collected in 2009 or later were included. Findings from 55 relevant articles were summarized by target populations: health care professionals, parents, underserved and disadvantaged populations, and males. FINDINGS: Health care professionals cited financial concerns and parental attitudes and concerns as barriers to providing the HPV vaccine to patients. Parents often reported needing more information before vaccinating their children. Concerns about the vaccine's effect on sexual behavior, low perceived risk of HPV infection, social influences, irregular preventive care, and vaccine cost were also identified as potential barriers among parents. Some parents of sons reported not vaccinating their sons because of the perceived lack of direct benefit. Parents consistently cited health care professional recommendations as one of the most important factors in their decision to vaccinate their children. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Continued efforts are needed to ensure that health care professionals and parents understand the importance of vaccinating adolescents before they become sexually active. Health care professionals may benefit from guidance on communicating HPV recommendations to patients and parents. Further efforts are also needed to reduce missed opportunities for HPV vaccination when adolescents interface with the health care system. Efforts to increase uptake should take into account the specific needs of subgroups within the population. Efforts that address system-level barriers to vaccination may help to increase overall HPV vaccine uptake.

OBJECTIVE: Despite guidelines recommending cervical cancer screening intervals be extended beyond one year, clinical practice has been slow to change. Patient preferences are a potential barrier. In the Centers for Disease Control's Cervical Cancer (Cx3) Study at Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) across Illinois, we surveyed patients about screening practices, and assessed beliefs regarding lengthening screening intervals. METHOD: We analyzed data from 984 low income women in the Cx3 Study (2009-2011). Participants completed a survey assessing health history, knowledge about Pap testing, beliefs and intentions about extending screening intervals, and demographics. RESULTS: The majority reported annual Pap testing (61%), while only 24% reported a 2-3year screening interval (recommendation at time of survey). Misunderstandings about the Pap test were prevalent, with over half believing it screened for vaginal, yeast, and sexually transmitted infections (58%-72%). Unfavorable beliefs about extending screening intervals were common. The majority (57%) indicated that they would not wait 3years to be screened if their physician recommended it, and intentions were associated with knowledge about Pap testing. CONCLUSION: Most women reported annual cervical cancer screening, and intended to resist longer screening intervals. Patients' lack of knowledge and unfavorable beliefs may serve as barriers to extending screening intervals.

PURPOSE: As the number of ovarian cancer survivors increases, so does the need for appropriate intervention and care. A literature review was conducted to assess the issues affecting ovarian cancer survivors in the USA, including the needs of younger survivors. METHODS: Articles on six topics (finances/employment, reproductive and sexual health, treatment effects, information needs, genomics, and end-of-life/palliative care) among ovarian cancer survivors were identified through comprehensive database searches. Abstracts for all citations were reviewed to determine relevancy. Data from relevant articles, defined as including a sample size of ≥20, published in English, involving human subjects in the USA, and published between 2000 and 2010, were abstracted. RESULTS: Thirty-four articles were relevant. Common, but often unaddressed, treatment side effects included infertility and issues with sexual health. Survivors reported not receiving adequate information about their disease. Hereditary cancer can lead to concern for family members. End-of-life/palliative care was often not addressed by physicians. Most of the studies used a cross-sectional design and lacked control groups. Participants were primarily recruited from academic medical centers or clinical trials and tended to be White. Few studies specifically addressed young survivors; however, reproductive health issues are common. CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer has wide-ranging impacts. This review emphasizes the need for more research among ovarian cancer survivors, particularly related to finances, reproductive and sexual health, information, genomics, and end-of-life care. Issues specific to young survivors also deserve more attention. Direction for future research and clinical implications are discussed.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and comprehensively present the psychosocial needs of ovarian cancer (OvCa) survivors, including young survivors <45 years of age. METHODS: A literature review was conducted using keywords specific to psychosocial health and OvCa survivorship to identify peer-reviewed, original research articles published in English between January 2000 and December 2010; 28 articles were identified as relevant. Articles were abstracted and results categorized according to six psychosocial domains: quality of life (QoL), social support and relationships, self-image and sexual functioning, psychological distress and functioning, fear of death/recurrence, and personal growth and coping. Findings unique to young survivors are presented when applicable. Psychosocial measurement tools used in relevant studies are also presented. RESULTS: Physical complications and side effec ts have significant impact on OvCa survivors' psychosocial health. Access to social support services and relational support is critical, as feelings of isolation are common. Survivors report low levels of sexual activity and satisfaction, potentially causing strain on personal relationships, and survivors experience high levels of distress, depression, and anxiety. However, QoL can improve after diagnosis for some OvCa survivors, many of whom report spiritual growth and strengthened personal relationships. Younger survivors are likely to have greater distress and lower QoL compared with older survivors. CONCLUSIONS: OvCa is the deadliest of all gynecologic cancers, greatly impacting the psychosocial health of survivors. Increased awareness of psychosocial health among OvCa survivors themselves, their social support system, and their health care providers is necessary to adequately address their unique needs. (Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

OBJECTIVE: Cervical cancer screening using the human papillomavirus (HPV) test and Pap test together (co-testing) is an option for average-risk women ≥30 years of age. With normal co-test results, screening intervals can be extended. The study objective is to assess primary care provider practices, beliefs, facilitators and barriers to using the co-test and extending screening intervals among low-income women. METHOD: Data were collected from 98 providers in 15 Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) clinics in Illinois between August 2009 and March 2010 using a cross-sectional survey. RESULTS: 39% of providers reported using the co-test, and 25% would recommend a three-year screening interval for women with normal co-test results. Providers perceived greater encouragement for co-testing than for extending screening intervals with a normal co-test result. Barriers to extending screening intervals included concerns about patients not returning annually for other screenings (77%), patient concerns about missing cancer (62%), and liability (52%). CONCLUSION: Among FQHC providers in Illinois, few administered the co-test for screening and recommended appropriate intervals, possibly due to concerns over loss to follow-up and liability. Education regarding harms of too-frequent screening and false positives may be necessary to balance barriers to extending screening intervals.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 6% of breast cancers in the United States occur in women under the age of 40 years. Compared with women ≥40 years of age, younger women are diagnosed at later stages, have higher rates of recurrence and death, and may be predisposed to secondary breast or ovarian cancer. An informal meeting of experts discussed opportunities for research and public health communication related to breast cancer among young (<40 and/or premenopausal) women. METHODS: In September 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention hosted 18 experts in oncology, genetics, behavioral science, survivorship and advocacy, public health, communication, ethics, nutrition, physical activity, and environmental health. They (1) reviewed research and programmatic knowledge on risk and preventive factors, early detection, and survivorship; and (2) discussed ideas for research, communication, and programmatic efforts related to young women diagnosed with or at risk for early onset breast cancer. RESULTS: Levels of evidence and themes for future research regarding risk and preventive factors, including exposures, were discussed. Early detection strategies, including screening, risk assessment, and genetic counseling, as well as survivorship issues, follow-up care, fertility and reproductive health, and psychosocial care were highlighted. CONCLUSION: Community and academic researchers, providers, advocates, and the federal public health community discussed strategies and opportunities for this unique population. Although the evidence is limited, future research and communication activities may be useful to organize future public health initiatives.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening guidelines have evolved significantly in the last decade for young adult women, with current recommendations promoting later initiation and longer intervals. METHODS: Using self-reported cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2000-2010 data, trends in Papanicolaou (Pap) testing among women aged 18-29 years were examined. NHIS 2010 data were used to investigate age at first Pap test (N=2,198), time since most recent Pap test (n=1,622), and predictors of Pap testing within the last 12 months (n=1,622). RESULTS: The percentage of 18-year-olds who reported ever having a Pap test significantly decreased from 49.9% in 2000 to 37.9% in 2010. Mean age at first Pap test in 2010 was significantly younger for non-Hispanic black women (16.9 years), women <high school education (16.9 years), women who received the HPV vaccine (17.1 years), and women who have ever given birth (17.3 years). The majority reported their last Pap test within the previous 12 months (73.1%). Usual source of healthcare (OR 2.31) and current birth control use (OR 1.64) significantly increased chances of having a Pap test within the previous 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: From 2000 to 2010 there was a gradual decline in Pap test initiation among 18-year-olds, however, in 2010 many women reported ≤12 months since last screening. Evidence-based guidelines should be promoted, as screening young adult women for cervical cancer more frequently than recommended can cause considerable harms. IMPACT: A baseline of cervical cancer screening among young adult women in the United States to assess adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines recommend when the human papillomavirus (HPV) and Papanicolaou tests are used together (HPV co-test) for routine cervical cancer screening, screening intervals can be extended to 3 years. We assessed HPV test practices and Papanicolaou test screening interval recommendations of US providers. STUDY DESIGN: Using a multistage probability design, we analyzed nationally representative data that were collected in 2006 through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. RESULTS: Approximately 51% of providers ordered the HPV co-test; however, clinical vignettes found that <15% of providers who ordered the HPV test recommend the next Papanicolaou test in 3 years for women with concurrent normal HPV co-test results and a documented normal screening history. CONCLUSION: Overall, annual cervical cancer screening continues to be a common recommendation, regardless of whether a screening history has been established or an HPV test has been ordered.