Programs and Communities
The collection collates collections by schools, centers, programs, and research groups.
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Cancer
- All Subjects: Food security
Routine cervical cancer screening has significantly decreased the mortality rate of cervical cancer. Today, cervical cancer predominantly affects those who are rarely or never screened. Government programs are in place to provide cervical cancer screening at little to no cost, yet screening rates remain suboptimal.
This project evaluated an evidence-based intervention to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in a federally qualified health center (FQHC). Female patients ages 21 to 65 years without history of hysterectomy (n=1,710) were sent reminders to their phones through the electronic health record (EHR). The message included educational material about the screening process and an announcement regarding government aid for free or reduced cost screening.
The number of patients who made an appointment after receiving the message was assessed two months later. In total, 156 responses were collected, and 28 patients made an appointment for screening. The most frequently observed category of Ethnicity was Hispanic/Latina (n = 24, 86%). The most frequently observed category of Insurance was Title X (n = 13, 46%). The observations for Age had an average of 41.04 (SD = 9.93). Using an EHR communication function to send motivational reminders has shown some promise for increasing cervical cancer screening, thereby reducing cervical cancer mortality among the underserved.
Investigation of how digitalization of agriculture and agrifood systems affect local and regional food systems
As of May 2022, there have been more than 80 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 across the United States, and over two million cases in Arizona. The pandemic has had a devastating impact on local, national, and global economies. This brief features the findings from data collected from a survey administered to Arizona residents in April of 2021, as well as national statistics, to understand some of the economic consequences of COVID-19 and its impacts on Arizona households.
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has affected employment and food security globally and in the United States. To understand the impacts of COVID-19 on food security in Arizona, a representative survey of Arizona households was launched online from July 1 to August 10, 2020. This brief provides an overview of changes in food security rate, perceived worries and challenges about food security, as well as behavioral changes and strategies adopted since the pandemic. Additional briefs from the Arizona survey covering topics on economic consequences, food access, and participations in food assistance programs during the pandemic are also available.
In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a sudden and severe economic downturn. Between February and May 2020, the number of unemployed individuals rose by more than 14 million, resulting in an unprecedented increase in the unemployment rate, which went from 3.8% in February to 14.4% in April. Even though unemployment has declined in recent months, with some individuals returning to work, the rate is still much higher than it was one year ago (7.9% in September 2020 vs. 3.5% in September 2019). Further, as of September 2020, there are 19.4 million persons unable to work due to the pandemic, as well as 6.3 million persons working only part time even though they would prefer to work more.
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in the food supply and high rates of unemployment and under-employment, both in Arizona and nationally. These emergencies required food assistance programs to adapt quickly and in unprecedented ways by relaxing eligibility criteria, improvising on delivery modalities, and increasing benefits. To examine food assistance program participation during the pandemic, we collected data from a representative sample of 620 Arizona households. The sample was drawn from across Arizona in July-August 2020 using an online survey. This brief provides the summary for participation in key food assistance programs, namely, the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Program for Women Infants and Children (WIC), School Food Programs, and the emergency food assistance provided through food pantries.
Purpose: To collect and analyze participant demographic information and explore use of instruments to measure perceived social support and quality of life at a local cancer support program. Specific objectives included:
1. Gather and analyze participant demographic information and program utilization by participants for a non-profit cancer support agency.
2. Assess the extent to which those using the support programs experience perceived social support (PSS) and quality of life (QOL).
3. Assess the utility of the survey process and selected instruments to guide program planning.
Background: Obtaining the diagnosis of cancer is traumatic, but support groups assist in emotional healing among group members. There is strong evidence correlating support group participation with PSS and QOL. The Wilson and Cleary model of QOL clearly links social support and QOL and provided the conceptual framework for this project.
Methods: A survey for self-reported participant demographics, support activities, QOL scores, and PSS scores was implemented. Both online and pencil and paper surveys were available. Instruments included the Flanagan Quality of Life Scale (Cronbach’s α = .82 to .92) and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support Scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) and a demographic survey created for this project.
Outcomes: All but one survey was completed online (n=48). Respondents were primarily white, female, cancer free at the time of the survey, and over the age of 55. QOL and PSS scores within this sample emulated previous research of correlations between instruments and people with chronic illnesses.
Conclusion: Correlations of sample demographics and instrument scores reflected current literature; this project validates an effective and affordable means to evaluate program effectiveness. Future use of the survey is to better tailor services to meet the objectives of the agency to improve QOL for all individuals affected by cancer.
Keywords: Cancer, support group, quality of life, perceived social support
Background and Significance: CRC is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States among men and women. Current CRC screening rates remain low, even with advanced screening options available. Meaningful Use sets specific objectives for health care providers to achieve. Documenting CRC screening status and recommending CRC screenings to patients is one of the objectives of Meaningful Use and is considered a Clinical Quality Measure (HealthIT.gov). Factors that lead to CRC screening include primary care providers (PCPs) raising the topic, involving support staff, involving patients in the decision-making process, and setting alerts in electronic health records (EHRs).
Methods: The Health Belief Model and Ottawa Model of Research Use helped guide this project. The project took place at a private primary care practice. The focus was on patients between the ages of 50 and 75 years old meeting criteria for CRC. Five PCPS and five medical assistants (MAs) chose to participate in the study. Participants were given pre and post Practice Culture Assessment (PCA) surveys to measure perceptions of the practice culture. The project included a three-part practice change: PCP and MA education about CRC screening guidelines, EHR documentation and reminders, and a change of patient visit workflow which included having MAs review patient's CRC screening status before they were seen by the PCP and handing out CRC screening brochures when appropriate. PCPs then ordered the appropriate CRC screening, and the MA documented the screening in the EHR under a designated location. CRC Screening Project Evaluation Forms were completed by MAs after each patient visit.
Outcomes: No significant difference from pre to post survey satisfaction scores were found (t (8) = - 1.542, p= = .162). Means of quantitative data were reported from the CRC screening evaluation forms; N=91. The most common method of screening chosen was colonoscopy, 87%. A strong correlation was found (r (-.293) = .01, p<.05) between receiving a CRC brochure and choosing a form of screening. Meaningful Use scores pre and post project are pending.
Conclusion: Patients are more likely to choose a screening method when the topic is raised in a primary care setting. Continued staff education on workflow is important to sustain this change. Further research is needed to evaluate cost effectiveness and sustainability of this practice change.