Understanding primary care physician perspectives on recommending HPV vaccination and addressing vaccine hesitancy

HPV vaccination rates have improved in recent years, but remain suboptimal in the United States. Physician recommendation is associated with increased uptake; however, specific strategies used by physicians to recommend the vaccine and address hesitancy are underexplored. We iteratively conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with family medicine and pediatrics/adolescent medicine physicians recruited from four primary care settings (federally qualified health centers and hospital-affiliated practices) within a large academic-hospital system in New Jersey. Interviews aimed to understand factors influencing physician recommendations. Transcripts were analyzed iteratively using a team-based, thematic content analysis approach. All physicians reported strong support for HPV vaccination, intention to recommend for target age groups, and providing factsheets to parents. Many physicians used electronic medical records and/or the state immunization registry for monitoring vaccinations, but few were able to report their own clinic-level rates. The majority said they needed to overcome both hesitancy for at least 10-30% of parents and misinformation from the internet. Most cited having their own children vaccinated for HPV as a first-line strategy for addressing parental hesitancy. Other strategies included using data or professional authority to address safety concerns, linking HPV to cervical cancer, highlighting only needing two doses if vaccinated younger, and normalizing the vaccine. While our findings indicate physicians are knowledgeable about HPV vaccination and recommend it to parents, strategies to overcome parental hesitancy varied. Physician, clinic, and health-system-based strategies need to be adopted to overcome parental hesitancy for HPV vaccination.

Evaluating the impact of the Patient Preference Assessment Tool on clinicians' recommendations for phase I oncology clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Many groups recommend assessment of patient preferences particularly for patients with advanced, incurable cancer. We, therefore, developed the Patient Preference Assessment Tool (PPAT) to ascertain patient preferences in order to inform clinician recommendations and improve shared decision-making. The aim of this study is to assess the PPAT's impact on clinicians' strength of recommendations for phase I oncology clinical trials.

METHODS

Clinicians recorded the strength of their recommendation on a Likert scale before viewing the patient's PPAT. After viewing the PPAT, the clinician discussed the clinical trial with the patient and then recorded the strength of recommendation again. If there was a change, the clinician noted the reason for the change: clinical findings or patient preference. Clinicians were interviewed about the acceptability of the tool. Our threshold for determining if a change in recommendation due to the PPAT was significant was 20%, given the multiple factors influencing a clinician's recommendation. We also noted the type of phase I conversation observed based on classifications defined in prior work-priming, treatment-options, trial logistics, consent.

RESULTS

N = 29. The strength of the clinicians' recommendations changed due to patient preferences in 7 of 29 (24%) of the conversations. The seven changes due to preferences were all in the 23 treatment-options conversations, for an impact rate of 30% in this type of conversation. 82% of clinicians found the PPAT useful.

CONCLUSION

The PPAT was impactful in an academic setting, exceeding our 20% impact threshold. This tool helps achieve the important goal of incorporating patient preferences into shared decision-making about clinical trials.

Relationship between maternal experiences and adolescent HPV vaccination

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been available for over a decade but its uptake rate is still low. To explore the relationship between the HPV vaccination status of a child and their mother's beliefs, behaviors and knowledge, we surveyed 1497 women with at least one child aged 9-17 y between September 2011 and November 2015. Physician recommendation was the most important factor associated with reported child vaccination status. Mothers who reported receiving a provider recommendation for the HPV vaccine were 32 times more likely to have a child who had been vaccinated compared with mothers who did not report provider recommendation (aOR) = 32.17; 95% CI: 21.77, 47.54). Knowing someone who had received the vaccine was also strongly associated with vaccination uptake (59% vs 12%, p < .001). Additionally, prior HPV diagnosis (aOR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.18, 3.10) and knowing someone with cervical cancer (aOR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.89) were associated with child vaccination status. Mothers who perceived moderate to high risk for their child contracting HPV or developing genital warts or cervical cancer were more likely to report that their daughters (but not their sons) had been vaccinated.

Predicted patient demand for a new delivery system for glaucoma medicine

Sustained-release drug delivery systems that replace the need for daily glaucoma medications will improve outcomes for those who are nonadherent and reduce the inconvenience of having to take medications on a recurring basis.The objective is to estimate uptake (i.e., demand) for a new technology that delivers sustained-release glaucoma medication and to investigate how uptake varies by product attributes, physician recommendations, peer adoption (i.e., percentage of patients seen in a clinic using the new technology), and patient characteristics.In a web-enabled discrete-choice experiment survey, glaucoma patients in the United States were asked to choose between continuing eye drop use or purchasing the new delivery system. In a cross-sectional web-enabled survey, ophthalmologists were asked their likelihood of recommending the new technology based on product and patient characteristics.Study participants were 500 glaucoma patients who were on topical administration of daily eye drops and 155 ophthalmologists who practice in the US.Main outcomes were predicted uptake for patients and likelihood of recommending a new drug delivery system for ophthalmologists. Logistic models were used to analyze the choice data.Uptake was estimated to be 18% at an annual cost of $1000 and to be 24% when the cost was $500. A physician's recommendation increased uptake by 6% to 12%, whereas an increase in peer adoption from 5% to 50% increased uptake by 3% to 7%. Patients aged ≥ 65 and those with lower income were more likely to remain on eye drops. Physicians were more likely to recommend a product if the interval between administrations is 6 months or longer and when long-term safety and efficacy data are available. They were less likely to recommend it to patients with lower income and no adherence problems.Results suggest a significant interest in an injectable solution or other sustained-release alternatives to daily eye drops. However, in this survey, patient uptake was greatly influenced by out-of-pocket cost and the interval between treatment administrations. Few physicians were willing to recommend sustained-release technology if the treatment interval was less than 3 months.

Self-Medication of Somatic and Psychiatric Conditions Using Botanical Marijuana

As a complement to research evaluating botanical marijuana as a medical therapy for various somatic and psychiatric conditions, there is a growing body of research assessing marijuana users' self-reports of the symptoms and conditions for which they use marijuana without a physician's recommendation. As part of two larger web-based surveys and one in-situ survey at an outdoor marijuana festival, we asked regular marijuana users if they consumed the drug without a physician's recommendation and, if so, to describe (or select from a checklist) the conditions for which they used marijuana as a medication. Participants reported using marijuana to self-medicate a wide variety of both somatic conditions (such as pain, diabetes, and irritable bowel syndrome) and psychiatric conditions (such as depression, anxiety, and insomnia). Because fewer than half of the American states, and only a few countries, allow physicians to recommend medicinal marijuana, these findings may be of interest to clinicians as they treat patients, to lawmakers and policymakers as they consider legislation allowing physicians to recommend botanical marijuana for somatic and psychiatric conditions, and to researchers evaluating conditions that individuals elect to self-medicate using botanical marijuana.

Emergency medicine physician attitudes toward HPV vaccine uptake in an emergency department setting

A physician's recommendation is the most effective published method of motivating HPV vaccination initiation. The emergency department (ED) is the 'public health safety net', and often the only access to care for underserved populations. Recommendation of the HPV vaccine in the ED is a potential avenue to improve vaccination rates among sub-populations who do not have access to routine medical care. We assessed willingness of EM physicians to recommend the vaccine, target high-risk women, and disclose perceived barriers to vaccination in the ED. A cross sectional study using an 11-item survey, was used to assess physician attitudes toward recommending the HPV vaccine in an ED setting to age eligible patients. 67.4% stated they would recommend the vaccine, 23.9% were neutral, and 8.7% would not recommend the vaccine to age eligible patients in the ED. 41% noted lack of adequate reimbursement for vaccination as a barrier to vaccination in the ED (P<0.05). Physicians were comfortable targeting women at high risk for cervical cancer for vaccination (P<0.05). EM physicians are comfortable targeting high-risk women for HPV vaccination in an ED setting. Support of EM physicians in the national effort to improve HPV vaccine uptake is an important step in eradicating a largely preventable yet lethal cancer.

Adherence to physician recommendation to colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy among Hispanics

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among Hispanics in the United States (US), yet the use of CRC screening is low in this population. Physician recommendation has consistently shown to improve CRC screening.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the characteristics of Hispanic patients who adhere or do not adhere to their physician's recommendation to have a screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study featuring face-to-face interviews by culturally matched interviewers was conducted in primary healthcare clinics and community centers in New York City.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred Hispanic men and women aged 50 or older, at average risk for CRC, were interviewed. Two hundred and eighty (70%) reported receipt of a physician's recommendation for screening colonoscopy and are included in this study.

MAIN MEASURES

Dependent variable: self report of having had screening colonoscopy.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

sociodemographics, healthcare and health promotion factors.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 280 participants, 25% did not adhere to their physician's recommendation. Factors found to be associated with non-adherence were younger age, being born in the US, preference for completing interviews in English, higher acculturation, and greater reported fear of colonoscopy testing. The source of colonoscopy recommendation (whether it came from their usual healthcare provider or not, and whether it occurred in a community or academic healthcare facility) for CRC screening was not associated with adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that potentially identifiable subgroups of Hispanics may be less likely to follow their physician recommendation to have a screening colonoscopy and thus may decrease their likelihood of an early diagnosis and prompt treatment. Raising physicians' awareness to such patients' characteristics could help them anticipate patients who may be less adherent and who may need additional encouragement to undergo screening colonoscopy.

Why are Korean American physicians reluctant to recommend colorectal cancer screening to Korean American patients? Exploratory interview findings

BACKGROUND

Korean Americans have one of the lowest screening rates for colorectal cancer. Although physician recommendation is one of the most important predictors of cancer screening across populations, only few Korean American patients receive such a recommendation.

METHODS

We interviewed 14 Korean American physicians in Los Angeles area who primarily serve Korean Americans to explore why they are reluctant to recommend colorectal cancer screening to their Korean patients.

RESULTS

Physicians identified barriers attributable to themselves (i.e., lack of knowledge, fear of medicolegal liability), their patients (i.e., patient's unfamiliarity with the concept of screening), and the health care system (i.e., lack of referral network, poor reimbursement).

DISCUSSION

Our results suggest the need for multi-faceted interventions directed at the physicians, their patients, and the health care system. Further research is needed to validate our results and to assess the extent to which they apply to physicians from other racial/ethnic groups.

The influence of culture and cancer worry on colon cancer screening among older Chinese-American women

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the hypothesis that adherence to colon cancer screening guidelines among Chinese women was associated with Eastern cultural views and anxiety about developing colon cancer.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional data from a community-based longitudinal study were used to examine the hypothesis of this study. Measures of sociodemographics, medical access factors, cultural views of health care, cancer worry, and practices of colon cancer screening were administered by a computer assisted telephone interview.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred and thirty-three Chinese-American women from Metropolitan Washington, DC age 50 years and older and without a history of colon cancer completed the telephone interview.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Adherence to utilization of either fecal occult blood test (FOBT) within a year, sigmoidoscopy within five years, or colonoscopy within 10 years was used to define two outcome categories: current screeners and noncurrent screeners.

RESULTS

Controlling for covariates, this study found that: 1) women with more Eastern cultural views were less likely to be current screeners; 2) women who thought about the chance of getting colon cancer had approximately three-fold greater odds of being current screeners than women who never thought about colon cancer; and 3) women receiving physician recommendation for colon cancer screening had more than three-fold increased odds of being current screeners than those who had not received a recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to the lack of physician recommendation, older Chinese women face cultural and psychological barriers to obtaining timely colon cancer screening. These barriers may be reduced through culturally sensitive intervention studies.