Jackie Bonilla1, Cristian Escalera1, Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson2, Cathy Samayoa3, Carmen Ortiz4, Anita L Stewart5, Anna María Nápoles6. 1. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 3, Floor 5, Room E08, MD, 20892, Bethesda, USA. 2. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Suite 335, San Francisco, CA, 94143-0856, USA. 3. Health Equity Research Lab, Department of Biology, San Francisco State University, 1600 Holloway Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94132, USA. 4. Círculo de Vida Cancer Support and Resource Center, 2601 Mission St, Suite 702, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. 5. Institute for Health & Aging, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Suite 340, San Francisco, CA, 94118, USA. 6. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 3, Floor 5, Room E08, MD, 20892, Bethesda, USA. anna.napoles@nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Compared to their white counterparts, Latina breast cancer survivors experience poorer quality of care and worse health-related quality of life. Limited English proficiency (LEP) and patient engagement in cancer care could help explain these disparities. We assessed associations between LEP status and difficulty engaging with physicians, with self-reported quality of breast cancer care and health-related quality of life (physical and emotional well-being) among rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Analyses used cross-sectional baseline survey data from two studies that tested a stress management program among rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors in California. Medical information was collected through medical records review. Linear regression models examined bivariate and multivariable associations of LEP status (yes or no), difficulty engaging with doctors (asking questions and participating in treatment decisions) (1-4; higher score = greater difficulty), and rural versus urban site, with three outcomes: (1) quality of breast cancer care and information; (2) physical well-being; and (3) and emotional well-being, controlling for demographic and medical factors. RESULTS: The total sample included 304 women (151 from urban and 153 from rural sites). Mean age was 52.7 years (SD 10.9). Most were limited English proficient (84.5%) and had less than a high school education (67.8%). Difficulty engaging with doctors was inversely associated with patient ratings of quality of breast cancer care and information (B = - 0.190, p = 0.014), emotional well-being (B = - 1.866, p < 0.001), and physical well-being (B = - 1.272, p = 0.002), controlling for demographic and treatment factors. LEP (vs. not; B = 1.987, p = 0.040) was independently associated with physical well-being only. Rural/urban status was not related independently to any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors who report greater difficulty engaging with physicians experienced worse quality of breast cancer care and health-related quality of life. Promoting greater engagement of Latina breast cancer survivors in cancer care and providing medical interpreters when needed could improve patient outcomes among this vulnerable group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02931552 and NCT01383174.
BACKGROUND: Compared to their white counterparts, Latina breast cancer survivors experience poorer quality of care and worse health-related quality of life. Limited English proficiency (LEP) and patient engagement in cancer care could help explain these disparities. We assessed associations between LEP status and difficulty engaging with physicians, with self-reported quality of breast cancer care and health-related quality of life (physical and emotional well-being) among rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Analyses used cross-sectional baseline survey data from two studies that tested a stress management program among rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors in California. Medical information was collected through medical records review. Linear regression models examined bivariate and multivariable associations of LEP status (yes or no), difficulty engaging with doctors (asking questions and participating in treatment decisions) (1-4; higher score = greater difficulty), and rural versus urban site, with three outcomes: (1) quality of breast cancer care and information; (2) physical well-being; and (3) and emotional well-being, controlling for demographic and medical factors. RESULTS: The total sample included 304 women (151 from urban and 153 from rural sites). Mean age was 52.7 years (SD 10.9). Most were limited English proficient (84.5%) and had less than a high school education (67.8%). Difficulty engaging with doctors was inversely associated with patient ratings of quality of breast cancer care and information (B = - 0.190, p = 0.014), emotional well-being (B = - 1.866, p < 0.001), and physical well-being (B = - 1.272, p = 0.002), controlling for demographic and treatment factors. LEP (vs. not; B = 1.987, p = 0.040) was independently associated with physical well-being only. Rural/urban status was not related independently to any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Rural and urban Latina breast cancer survivors who report greater difficulty engaging with physicians experienced worse quality of breast cancer care and health-related quality of life. Promoting greater engagement of Latina breast cancer survivors in cancer care and providing medical interpreters when needed could improve patient outcomes among this vulnerable group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02931552 and NCT01383174.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Latino/hispanic; Patient engagement; Quality of care; Quality of life; Shared decision making
Authors: Mónica E López; Celia P Kaplan; Anna M Nápoles; E Shelley Hwang; Jennifer C Livaudais; Leah S Karliner Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2013-09-17
Authors: Kimlin T Ashing-Giwa; Judith S Tejero; Jinsook Kim; Geraldine V Padilla; Gerhard Hellemann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-02-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Kimberly A Wildes; Alexander R Miller; Sandra San Miguel de Majors; Pamela M Otto; Amelie G Ramirez Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Kenneth L Kehl; Mary Beth Landrum; Neeraj K Arora; Patricia A Ganz; Michelle van Ryn; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Tasha M Hughes; Katiuscha Merath; Qinyu Chen; Steven Sun; Elizabeth Palmer; Jay J Idrees; Victor Okunrintemi; Malcolm Squires; Eliza W Beal; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson; Anita L Stewart; Cathy Samayoa; Helen Palomino; Aday Urias; Nayeli Gonzalez; Alma Torres-Nguyen; LaVerne Coleman; Cristian Escalera; Vicken Y Totten; Carmen Ortiz; Anna Maria Nápoles Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.240