Publications

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer over-screening is common in older women. Messaging about breast cancer screening cessation may reduce over-screening but the broader informational environment often emphasizes screening continuation. We aimed to examine the effect of receiving consistent messages about breast cancer screening cessation versus conflicting messages (i.e., receiving messages about screening cessation and screening continuation from different sources).

METHODS: In a two-wave survey experiment with 3809 women 65 + years from a U.S. population-based online panel, we randomized participants to a) no messages, b) consistent messages promoting screening cessation, or c) conflicting messages - a message promoting screening continuation followed by a message promoting screening cessation.

RESULTS: The conflicting message group had significantly lower support for screening cessation in a hypothetical older woman (mean 3.87 [SD 2.00] on 7-point scale, 95 % CI 3.76-3.97) compared with the consistent message group (mean 4.17 [SD 1.99], 95 % CI 4.08-4.28), but was still significantly higher than the control group (mean 2.68 [SD 1.87], 95 % CI 2.54-2.82, p's < 0.001). Message effects on self-screening intentions were similar. Participants reported low rates of confusion, distrust or ambivalence.

CONCLUSIONS: Messaging about screening cessation can significantly increase older women's support for screening cessation, with low rates of negative reactions, even if there are competing messages on continued screening.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Messaging about screening cessation can be incorporated into clinical discussions or used in conjunction with other interventions aimed at reducing over-screening.

BACKGROUND: Limited access to primary care may disproportionately affect older adults, who often have greater chronic disease management and care coordination needs. However, little is known about the effect of having a primary care practitioner (PCP) on longevity in the aging population.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of having a usual source of primary care with mortality and life expectancy among US adults aged 65 and older.

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study, using nationally representative data from the 2000 and 2005 cohorts of the National Health Interview Survey linked with National Death Index records through 2019.

PARTICIPANTS: All respondents aged 65 to 84 (n = 10,873, weighted n = 16,484,914).

INTERVENTIONS/EXPOSURES: Having a usual source of primary care.

MAIN MEASURES: Using a Cox proportional hazards model, we examined the association between exposure to primary care and 15-year mortality, adjusting for sociodemographic factors and respondent life expectancy (using a validated index). We also used this model to generate survival curves by exposure to primary care and computed median survival times for each group.

KEY RESULTS: Overall, 60.3% of respondents were female, 83.6% were non-Hispanic White, and 6.4% (n = 739, weighted n = 1,056,554) did not have a usual source of primary care. Use of primary care was associated with a lower 15-year mortality risk (aHR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98). Median survival time was also at least 2.1 years longer among those who used primary care (> 15 years) compared to those who did not (12.9 years).

CONCLUSIONS: We found that primary care use is associated with greater survival among older adults. As the population of adults aged 65 + is growing rapidly, investing in primary care is essential for the health of US older adults.

BACKGROUND: Medical cannabis consumption is rising, but limited evidence informs the safety and efficacy of cannabis use in cancer patients. A national survey of oncology trainees found that most fellows felt insufficiently informed to make clinical recommendations about cannabis.

AIM: In this secondary analysis, we aimed to measure how frequently trainees recommend in favor of cannabis and determine factors influencing this clinical practice.

METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey study for fellows enrolled in oncology training programs across the United States, an online survey assessing trainee practices regarding medical cannabis was sent to 155 oncology fellowship program directors from January - March 2021; who were asked to distribute it to their fellows. The primary outcome was the frequency with which oncology fellows recommended cannabis in the prior year.

RESULTS: Nationally, 40 programs from 25 states participated, with 189 of 462 trainees across these programs responding (40.9% response rate). 22% (95% CI: 16.3-29.0%) of participants reported recommending medical cannabis to > 5 patients in the past year. 24% (95% CI: 18.4-30.5%) of participants had prior training in medical cannabis. Regarding participant characteristics, only prior training in medical cannabis was significantly associated with recommending cannabis to > 5 patients (RR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.4-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS: With increasing cannabis use among patients with cancer and given that a substantial number of oncology fellows recommend its use, it is crucial that fellowship training incorporate evidence-based curricula regarding medical cannabis use to guide informed decision-making between patients and their fellow providers.

OBJECTIVE: Messaging about breast cancer screening cessation may reduce over-screening by raising awareness of the harms of screening, but in a background of strongly positive beliefs about screening among the public, such messaging may be perceived negatively. We aimed to assess whether older women perceived it to be ethically appropriate for clinicians to share a message that encourages breast cancer screening cessation.

METHODS: As part of a large national online survey experiment with women 65+ years, we presented a message (hereafter referred to as primary message) describing the rationales for stopping breast cancer screening (e.g., guideline recommendation, harms of screening) and assessed how ethical women thought it would be for doctors to share this information with patients. We assessed open-ended reactions. We also tested two variations of the primary message with different wordings of the recommendation to consider stopping screening.

RESULTS: Of 683 participants, 75.9 % agreed that the primary message is ethically appropriate for doctors to share with patients., 13.2 % neither agree or disagree, and 10.9 % disagreed. Themes in open-ended responses suggested that the difference in participant response was partly attributed to whether participants perceived the message as informative or persuasive. Comparing across message variations, messages with stronger recommendations to stop screening were perceived to be less ethically appropriate than the primary message.

CONCLUSIONS: Most older women perceived that it was ethically appropriate for doctors to share messages aimed at reducing breast cancer over-screening with patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions should be developed to deliver messages to reduce over-screening among older women in practice settings, with evaluations to monitor their response.

BACKGROUND: Treatment burden refers to the patient-perceived effort of managing health and health care, which impacts quality of life and engagement in care. International studies of treatment burden have found high rates of treatment burden among adults with chronic conditions. However, the scope of treatment burden among US older adults is unknown. We described the prevalence of and characteristics associated with treatment burden among US adults age ≥ 50 years.

METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 1795 adult respondents to the 2022 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), a random sub-sample from a nationally-representative panel study of community-dwelling US adults age ≥ 50 years. The primary outcome was total treatment burden score (15 items each scored 0-10, total 0-150; threshold ≥ 59 for high burden). We used multivariable linear regression to examine the association between log-transformed total treatment burden score and sociodemographic, health, and functional status characteristics.

RESULTS: The mean age of 1795 respondents was 68.5 (SD 8.5) years, 56% were female, and the median TBQ score was 12 (IQR 5-25). Overall, 87% (n = 1550) reported treatment burden (TBQ score ≥ 1); 5% reported high burden. The most common sources of treatment burden were reminders of health problems (61%) and administrative (53%) and financial burdens (46%). Adults age ≥ 65 years were both less likely to report treatment burden and reported lower burden than adults age 50-64 years. Factors associated with greater burden included a higher number of chronic conditions, vision or hearing impairment, ADL/IADL difficulty, and mobility difficulty.

CONCLUSIONS: Most US adults age ≥ 50 years report treatment burden, though there is wide variation in the degree of burden reported. Reducing treatment burden within the US may require reducing administrative and financial burdens of care and addressing factors that impair patient capacity to manage health and health care.

BACKGROUND: Oncology providers often lack the confidence to make clinical recommendations about medical cannabis (MC). This study aimed to develop and evaluate the feasibility of implementing an educational curriculum on the use of MC in patient care for oncology trainees.

METHODS: A multidisciplinary team designed an educational curriculum for MC use in oncology. The curriculum was piloted as a 1-hour interactive webinar across 8 United States-based hematology/oncology fellowship programs between 2022 and 2023. Incentivized surveys measuring feasibility outcomes, including cultural attitudes/norms, acceptability, compatibility, and self-efficacy (a composite index of self-confidence in discussing MC efficacy, risks, modes of use, and role in symptom management), were distributed before, immediately after, and 12 weeks post-webinar.

RESULTS: Of 103 trainees, 75 (72.8%) completed the pretraining survey and 66 (64.1%) completed the posttraining survey. Most respondents believed discussions about the role of MC in symptom management were valuable (n=56; 74.7%), though few (14.7%) believed trainees were expected to engage in such discussions. Most participants rated the curriculum as helpful (92.4%), beneficial for oncology trainees (84.8%), and likely to be recommended to colleagues (87.9%). Post-webinar, 78.8% of participants reported an increased likelihood of initiating discussions with patients regarding MC. There were significant improvements in the composite self-confidence index from pre- to post-webinar (2.7% vs 65.2%; P<.001), which persisted in the follow-up surveys (n=36; response rate, 34.9%).

CONCLUSIONS: This multisite study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a novel curriculum focused on MC for oncology trainees. These findings can guide the design of a prospective, multi-institutional study to evaluate knowledge expansion, retention, and behavioral changes resulting from the intervention.