US Latina women experience disproportionately high cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates. These health disparities are largely preventable with routine pap tests and human papillomavirus (HPV) screening. This study tested the efficacy of a cervical cancer education intervention to improve risk factor knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and self-reported behavior related to cervical cancer screening among low-income Latinas who had not been screened in the past 2 years, compared to a usual care control group. Low-income Latinas who had not had a pap test in the prior 2 years were recruited from three Federally Qualified Health Centers and randomly assigned to intervention and control groups, with in-person assessment at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Women in the intervention group received a one-time low-literacy cervical cancer education program through an interactive, multimedia kiosk in either English or Spanish based on their language preference. Compared to the control group, the intervention group demonstrated greater knowledge (p < 0.0001) and more favorable attitudes at follow-up; fewer intervention group women never thought of getting a pap test (46 vs. 54 %, p = 0.050) or agreed that it is fate whether a woman gets cervical cancer or not (24 vs. 31 %, p = 0.043). The groups did not differ significantly on the proportion who had obtained or made an appointment for a pap test at follow-up (51 vs. 48 %, p = 0.35). Both groups reported high levels of self-efficacy regarding pap screening at post-intervention. A one-time interactive, multimedia educational intervention improved cervical cancer knowledge and attitudes among low-income Latinas but had no effect on cervical cancer-screening behavior. Exposure of the control group to the pre-test conducted on the multimedia kiosk may have influenced their screening behavior.

Objective

To develop a conceptually equivalent Chinese-language translation of the eighteen-item US Household Food Security Survey Module.

Design

In the current qualitative study, we (i) highlight methodological challenges which arise in developing survey instruments that will be used to make comparisons across language groups and (ii) describe the development of a Chinese-language translation of the US Household Food Security Survey Module, called the San Francisco Chinese Food Security Module.

Setting

Community sites in San Francisco, CA, USA.

Subjects

We conducted cognitive interviews with twenty-two community members recruited from community sites hosting food pantries and with five professionals recruited from clinical settings.

Results

Development of conceptually equivalent surveys can be difficult. We highlight challenges related to dialect, education, literacy (e.g. preferences for more or less formal phrasing), English words and phrases for which there is no Chinese language equivalent (e.g. 'balanced meals' and 'eat less than you felt you should') and response formats. We selected final translations to maximize: (i) consistency of the Chinese translation with the intent of the English version; (ii) clarity; and (iii) similarities in understanding across dialects and literacy levels.

Conclusions

Survey translation is essential for conducting research in many communities. The challenges encountered illustrate how literal translations can affect the conceptual equivalence of survey items across languages. Cognitive interview methods should be routinely used for survey translation when such non-equivalence is suspected, such as in surveys addressing highly culturally bound behaviours such as diet and eating behaviours. Literally translated surveys lacking conceptual equivalence may magnify or obscure important health inequalities.

The purpose of this study was to assess differences in COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake between low-income and non-low-income adults and across race-ethnicity. We utilized data from the COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden online survey, which included baseline (12/17/2020-2/11/2021) and 6-month follow-up (8/13/2021-9/9/2021) surveys. The sample included 1,500 Black/African American, Latino, and White low-income adults living in the U.S. (N = 500 each). A non-low-income cohort was created for comparison (n = 1,188). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess differences in vaccine willingness and uptake between low-income and non-low-income adults, as well as across race-ethnicity (low-income adults only). Only low-income White adults were less likely to be vaccinated compared to their non-low-income counterparts (extremely willing vs. not at all: OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.39-0.86); low-income Black/African American and Latino adults were just as willing or more willing to vaccinate. At follow-up, only 30.2% of low-income adults who reported being unwilling at baseline were vaccinated at follow-up. White low-income adults (63.6%) appeared less likely to be vaccinated, compared to non-low-income White adults (80.9%), low-income Black/African American (70.7%), and low-income Latino adults (72.4%). Distrust in the government (46.6), drug companies (44.5%), and vaccine contents (52.1%) were common among those unwilling to vaccinate. This prospective study among a diverse sample of low-income adults found that low-income White adults were less willing and less likely to vaccinate than their non-low-income counterparts, but this difference was not observed for Black/African American or Latino adults. Distrust and misinformation were prevalent among those who remained unvaccinated at follow-up.

Background

Patients with language barriers suffer significant health disparities, including adverse events and poor health outcomes. While remote language services can help improve language access, these modalities remain persistently underused. The objective of this study was to understand clinician experiences and challenges using dual-handset interpreter telephones and to inform recommendations for future language access interventions.

Methods

We conducted four focus groups with nurses (N=14) and resident physicians (N=20) to understand attitudes toward dual-handset interpreter telephones in the hospital, including general impressions, effects on communication, situations in which they did and did not use them, and impact on clinical care. Three researchers independently coded all transcripts using a constant comparative approach, meeting repeatedly to discuss coding and to reconcile differences to reach consensus.

Results

We identified five salient themes, including increased language access (improved convenience, flexibility, and versatility of phones over in-person or ad hoc interpreters); effects on interpersonal processes of care (improved ability to communicate directly with patients); effects on clinical processes of care (improvements in critical patient care functions, including pain and medication management); impact on time (needing extra time for interpreted encounters and perceived delays impacting future use); and patients for whom, and circumstances in which, the dual-handset interpreter telephone is inadequate (e.g., complex discussions, hands-on instruction, or multiple speakers are present).

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that clinicians value dual-handset interpretation in bridging communication barriers and highlight recommendations to guide future implementation interventions to increase the uptake of remote language services in hospital settings.

Purpose of the study

To assess the effects of receiving a research informational pamphlet produced by the federal Office for Human Research Protections on telephone survey participation rates of older Latinos, and illustrate the feasibility of nesting recruitment studies within other funded studies when stand alone funding for recruitment studies is limited.

Design and methods

Latino patients aged ≥50 with ≥1 visit during the preceding year (N=1314) were sampled from three community clinics and a multi-specialty medical group. Patients were randomly assigned to receive or not receive a pamphlet that contained information on research participation in the initial mailing for the telephone survey study. Survey participation rates were compared between the pamphlet and no pamphlet groups.

Results

In a multivariate model, women (OR=1.4; 95% CI 1.1, 1.8), and those with public insurance (vs. no insurance; OR=1.7; 95% CI 1.1, 2.5) were more likely to participate, while those age 65+ (vs. age 50-54; OR=0.6; 95% CI 0.4, 0.8) were less likely to participate; there was no significant difference by pamphlet group (OR=0.8; 95% CI 0.7, 1.1). Nesting of the randomized trial of the recruitment pamphlet within the funded study required minimal additional resources.

Implications

Recruitment methods that are more intensive than a pamphlet may be needed to enhance survey participation rates among older Latinos. Nesting recruitment trials within funded studies is a promising and efficient approach for testing recruitment strategies.

Background

Limited English-proficient patients suffer poorer quality of care and outcomes. Interpreters can ameliorate these disparities; however, evidence is lacking on the quality of different interpretation modes.

Objective

Compare accuracy of interpretation for in-person (IP) professional, professional videoconferencing (VC), and ad hoc (AH) interpretation.

Design

A cross-sectional study of transcribed audiotaped primary care visits.

Subjects

Subjects included 32 Spanish-speaking Latino patients and 14 clinicians.

Measures

Independent coding of transcripts by 4 coders (2 were internists) for accurate and inaccurate interpretation instances. Unit of analysis was a segment of continuous speech or text unit (TU). Two internists independently verified inaccurate interpretation instances and rated their clinical significance as clinically insignificant, mildly, moderately, or highly clinically significant.

Results

Accurate interpretation made up 70% of total coded TUs and inaccurate interpretation (errors) made up 30%. Inaccurate interpretation occurred at twice the rate for AH (54% of coded TUs) versus IP (25%) and VC (23%) interpretation, due to more errors of omission (P<0.001) and answers for patient or clinician (P<0.001). Mean number of errors per visit was 27, with 7.1% of errors rated as moderately/highly clinically significant. In adjusted models, the odds of inaccurate interpretation were lower for IP (OR=0.25, 95% CI, 0.19, 0.33) and VC (OR=0.31; 95% CI, 0.17, 0.56) than for AH interpreted visits; the odds of a moderately/highly clinically significant error were lower for IP (OR=0.25; 95% CI, 0.06, 0.99) than for AH interpreted visits.

Conclusions

Inaccurate language interpretation in medical encounters is common and more frequent when untrained interpreters are used compared with professional IP or through VC. Professional VC interpretation may increase access to higher quality medical interpretation services.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess differences in COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake between rural and nonrural adults, and within rural racial-ethnic groups.

Methods

We utilized data from the COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden online survey, which included 1,500 Black/African American, Latino, and White rural adults (n = 500 each). Baseline (12/2020-2/2021) and 6-month follow-up (8/2021-9/2021) surveys were administered. A cohort of nonrural Black/African American, Latino, and White adults (n = 2,277) was created to compare differences between rural and nonrural communities. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess associations between rurality, race-ethnicity, and vaccine willingness and uptake.

Findings

At baseline, only 24.9% of rural adults were extremely willing to be vaccinated and 28.4% were not at all willing. Rural White adults were least willing to be vaccinated, compared to nonrural White adults (extremely willing: aOR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64). At follow-up, 69.3% of rural adults were vaccinated; however, only 25.3% of rural adults who reported being unwilling to vaccinate were vaccinated at follow-up, compared to 95.6% of adults who were extremely willing to be vaccinated and 76.3% who were unsure. Among those unwilling to vaccinate at follow-up, almost half reported distrust in the government (52.3%) and drug companies (46.2%); 80% reported that nothing would change their minds regarding vaccination.

Conclusions

By August 2021, almost 70% of rural adults were vaccinated. However, distrust and misinformation were prevalent among those unwilling to vaccinate at follow-up. To continue to effectively combat COVID-19 in rural communities, we need to address misinformation to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates.

Background

Patient-reported measures of clinicians' cultural sensitivity are important to assess comprehensively quality of care among ethnically diverse patients and may help address persistent health inequities.

Objective

Create a patient-reported, multidimensional survey of clinicians' cultural sensitivity to cultural factors affecting quality of care.

Design

Using a comprehensive conceptual framework, items were written and field-tested in a cross-sectional telephone survey. Multitrait scaling and factor analyses were used to develop measures.

Setting and participants

Latino patients age ≥50 from primary care practices in California.

Main variables studied

Thirty-five items hypothesized to assess clinicians' sensitivity.

Main outcomes measures

Validity and reliability of cultural sensitivity measures.

Results

Twenty-nine of 35 items measuring 14 constructs were retained. Eleven measures assessed sensitivity issues relevant to all participants: complementary and alternative medicine, mind-body connections, causal attributions, preventive care, family involvement, modesty, prescription medications, spirituality, physician discrimination due to education, physician discrimination due to race/ethnicity and staff discrimination due to race/ethnicity. Three measures were group specific: two to limited English proficient patients (sensitivity to language needs and discrimination due to language) and one to immigrants (sensitivity to immigrant status). Twelve multi-item scales demonstrated adequate reliability (alpha ≥0.68 except for Spanish discrimination due to education) and evidence of construct validity (item-scale correlations for all scales >0.40 except for sensitivity to immigrant status). Two single-item measures demonstrated sufficient construct validity to retain for further development.

Discussion and conclusions

The Clinicians' Cultural Sensitivity Survey can be used to assess the quality of care of older Latino patients.

Objective

To examine differences in treatment decision-making participation, satisfaction, and regret among Latinas and non-Latina whites with DCIS.

Methods

Survey of Latina and non-Latina white women diagnosed with DCIS. We assessed women's preferences for involvement in decision-making, primary treatment decision maker, and participatory decision-making. We examined primary outcomes of satisfaction with treatment decision-making and treatment regret by ethnic-language group.

Results

Among 745 participants (349 Latinas, 396 white) Spanish-speaking Latinas (SSL) had the highest mean preference for involvement in decision-making score and the lowest mean participatory decision-making score and were more likely to defer their final treatment decision to their physicians than English-speaking Latinas or whites (26%, 13%, 18%, p<0.05). SSLs reported lower satisfaction with treatment decision-making (OR 0.4; CI 95%, 0.2-0.8) and expressed more regret than whites (OR 6.2; CI 95%, 3.0-12.4). More participatory decision-making increased the odds of satisfaction (OR 1.5; CI 95%, 1.3-1.8) and decreased the odds of treatment regret (OR 0.8; CI 95%, 0.7-1.0), independent of ethnicity-language.

Conclusion

Language barriers impede the establishment of decision-making partnerships between Latinas and their physicians, and result in less satisfaction with the decision-making process and more treatment regret.

Practice implications

Use of professional interpreters may address communication-related disparities for these women.

Introduction

While financial hardship has been consistently linked to psychological distress, little research exists on associations between financial hardship experienced during the pandemic and mental health.

Methods

We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults, 12/2020-2/2021 (n=5500). Six financial hardship domains were measured (lost income, debt, unmet expenses, unmet health care expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). Psychological distress measures included anxiety-depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), perceived stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), and loneliness-isolation ("In the past month, how often have you felt lonely and isolated?"). Associations between financial hardship and psychological distress were estimated using multinomial logistic regression.

Results

Overall, 70.3% of participants reported experiencing financial hardship (substantial hardship: 21.3%; some hardship: 27.4%; and a little hardship: 21.6%), with Spanish-speaking Latino (87.3%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (79.2%) adults being most likely. Debt (57.6%), lost income (44.5%), and unmet expenses (33.7%) were the most common. There was a dose-response association between financial hardship and moderate/severe anxiety-depression symptoms (a little hardship: adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12-1.80; some hardship: aOR=3.21, 95% CI=2.58-3.98; and substantial hardship: aOR=8.15, 95% CI=6.45-10.29). Similar dose-response trends were observed with perceived stress and loneliness-isolation. No racial-ethnic difference in the association between financial hardship during the pandemic and psychological distress was seen.

Discussion

Financial hardship has had a major impact on psychological distress during the pandemic; moreover, while no racial-ethnic difference in the effect of financial hardship was observed, because racial-ethnic minorities experienced greater hardship, financial hardship may exacerbate psychological distress disparities.