BACKGROUND: Providing breast cancer patients with needed information and support is an essential component of quality care. This study investigated racial/ethnic variations in the information received and in the availability of peer support. METHODS: In total, 1766 women who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer and reported to the Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry from June 2005 to May 2006 were mailed a survey after initial treatment. Among accrued cases, 96.2% met eligibility criteria (n = 1698), and 72% completed the survey. Race/ethnicity categories were white, African American, and Latinas (2 categories indicating low or high acculturation, which was determined by using the Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics). Outcomes included receipt and need for treatment-related and survivorship-related information, difficulty understanding information, and support from women with breast cancer. RESULTS: More women reported receiving treatment-related information than survivorship-related information. After adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment factors, a higher percentage of low acculturated Latina women desired more information on treatment-related and survivorship-related issues (P < .001). Significantly more Latina low acculturated women than white women reported difficulty understanding written materials, with 74.5% requiring help from others. A higher percentage of all minority groups compared with whites reported no contact with other women with breast cancer (P < .05) and reported less contact through family/friends (P < .05). Women rated the benefit of talking to other women high, particularly with emotional issues. CONCLUSIONS: Continued efforts to provide culturally appropriate information and support needs to women with breast cancer are necessary to achieve quality care. Latinas with low acculturation reported more unmet information and care support needs than women in other racial/ethnic groups. (c) 2008 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: Providing breast cancerpatients with needed information and support is an essential component of quality care. This study investigated racial/ethnic variations in the information received and in the availability of peer support. METHODS: In total, 1766 women who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer and reported to the Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry from June 2005 to May 2006 were mailed a survey after initial treatment. Among accrued cases, 96.2% met eligibility criteria (n = 1698), and 72% completed the survey. Race/ethnicity categories were white, African American, and Latinas (2 categories indicating low or high acculturation, which was determined by using the Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics). Outcomes included receipt and need for treatment-related and survivorship-related information, difficulty understanding information, and support from women with breast cancer. RESULTS: More women reported receiving treatment-related information than survivorship-related information. After adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment factors, a higher percentage of low acculturated Latina women desired more information on treatment-related and survivorship-related issues (P < .001). Significantly more Latina low acculturated women than white women reported difficulty understanding written materials, with 74.5% requiring help from others. A higher percentage of all minority groups compared with whites reported no contact with other women with breast cancer (P < .05) and reported less contact through family/friends (P < .05). Women rated the benefit of talking to other women high, particularly with emotional issues. CONCLUSIONS: Continued efforts to provide culturally appropriate information and support needs to women with breast cancer are necessary to achieve quality care. Latinas with low acculturation reported more unmet information and care support needs than women in other racial/ethnic groups. (c) 2008 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Neeraj K Arora; Lila J Finney Rutten; David H Gustafson; Richard Moser; Robert P Hawkins Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Jennifer J Griggs; Melony E S Sorbero; Julie B Mallinger; Megan Quinn; Margaret Waterman; Beverly Brooks; Brian Yirinec; Cleveland G Shields Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2006-11-29
Authors: Anna M Nápoles-Springer; Carmen Ortíz; Helen O'Brien; Marynieves Díaz-Méndez; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Nancy K Janz; Sarah E Lillie; Christopher R Friese; Jennifer J Griggs; John J Graff; Ann S Hamilton; Sarika Jain; Steven J Katz Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2010-11-12
Authors: Elizabeth A Medeiros; Sheila F Castañeda; Patricia Gonzalez; Bárbara Rodríguez; Christina Buelna; Demy West; Gregory A Talavera Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Adam C Carle; Pascal Jean-Pierre; Paul Winters; Patricia Valverde; Kristen Wells; Melissa Simon; Peter Raich; Steven Patierno; Mira Katz; Karen M Freund; Donald Dudley; Kevin Fiscella Journal: Med Care Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Monica Morrow; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; John J Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley; Monica Morrow; Jennifer J Griggs; Reshma Jagsi; Ann S Hamilton; John J Graff; Christopher R Friese; Timothy P Hofer Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; Jennifer J Griggs; Amy K Alderman; Mahasin Mujahid; Steven J Katz Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2008-11
Authors: Nancy K Janz; Mahasin S Mujahid; Sarah T Hawley; Jennifer J Griggs; Amy Alderman; Ann S Hamilton; John Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2009-09-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Sarah E Lillie; Nancy K Janz; Christopher R Friese; John J Graff; Kendra Schwartz; Ann S Hamilton; Brittany Bartol Gay; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 2.172