Cancer-related knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors among Hispanic/Latino residents of Indiana.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the leading cause of death for Hispanics in the USA. Screening and prevention reduce cancer morbidity and mortality. METHODS: This study administered a cross-sectional web-based survey to self-identified Hispanic residents in the state of Indiana to assess their cancer-related knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors, as well as to identify what factors might be associated with cancer screening and prevention. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used to compare associations and logistic regression used to develop both univariate and multivariate regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1520 surveys were completed, median age of respondents was 53, 52% identified as men, 50.9% completed the survey in Spanish, and 60.4% identified the USA as their country of birth. Most were not able to accurately identify ages to begin screening for breast, colorectal, or lung cancer, and there were significant differences in cancer knowledge by education level. US-born individuals with higher income and education more often believed they were likely to develop cancer and worry about getting cancer. Sixty eight percent of respondents were up-to-date with colorectal, 44% with breast, and 61% with cervical cancer screening. Multivariate models showed that higher education, lack of fatalism, older age, lower household income, and unmarried status were associated with cervical cancer screening adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Among a Hispanic population in the state of Indiana, factors associated with cervical cancer screening adherence were similar to the general population, with the exceptions of income and marital status. Younger Hispanic individuals were more likely to be adherent with breast and colorectal cancer screening, and given the higher incidence of cancer among older individuals, these results should guide future research and targeted outreach.

Financial Impact of COVID-19 on Dental Care for Pediatric Patients: a Dental Claims Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on private dental insurance claims for pediatric dental care. METHODS: Commercial dental insurance claims for patients in the United States ages 18 and younger were obtained and analyzed. The claims dates ranged from January 1, 2019, to August 31, 2020. Total claims paid, average paid amount per visit, and the number of visits were compared between provider specialties and patient age groups from 2019 to 2020. RESULTS: Total paid claims and total number of visits per week were significantly lower in 2020 compared to 2019 from mid-March to mid-May (P<0.001). There were generally no differences from mid-May through August (P>0.15), except for significantly lower total paid claims and visits per week for "other" specialists in 2020 (P<0.005). The average paid amount per visit was significantly higher during the COVID shutdown period for 0-5 year-olds (P<0.001) but significantly lower for all other ages. CONCLUSIONS: Dental care was greatly reduced during the COVID shutdown period and was slower to recover for "other" specialties. Younger patients ages zero to five years had more expensive dental visits during the shutdown period.

Trends in dental insurance claims in the United States in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: A 3-year perspective (2019-2022).

OBJECTIVES: We showed in a previous analysis the patterns of disruption for private dental insurance claims in the United States caused by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in 2020. The present report examines trends during 2020 and 2021, that is, contrasting perspectives during 2019 with the acute phase of the pandemic in 2020, and 2021. METHODS: Private dental insurance paid claims from a data warehouse were obtained, encompassing a 5% random sample of records between January 2019 and December 2021 for child and adult insureds who filed a claim in 2019, 2020, and 2021. We classified claims into one of four categories based on the likelihood of being associated with urgent/emergency care. RESULTS: The precipitous reduction in dental care claims in March-June 2020 recovered to almost pre-pandemic levels by the fall of 2020. However, a downward decline in private dental insurance claims started in the late fall of 2020 and continued through 2021. Differential impacts in dental care categories-in terms of urgency of care-were evident 2021, closely resembling previous trends in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Dental care claims from the first year of the 2020 SARS-CoV-2 pandemic were contrasted with perspectives in 2021. A downward trend in demand/availability changes in dental care insurance claims set in for 2021, perhaps linked to perceptions of the overall economic situation. Such downward trend has continued overall, even after considering seasonal changes and the acceleration of the pandemic during the Delta, Omicron, and other variants.

COVID-19 vaccine: A 2021 analysis of perceptions on vaccine safety and promise in a U.S. sample.

BACKGROUND: Despite reliable evidence-based research supporting the COVID-19 vaccines, population-wide confidence and trust remain limited. We sought to expand prior knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine perceptions, while determining which population groups are at greatest risk for not getting a vaccine. METHODS: Study participants in the U.S. (79% female, median age group 46-60 years) were recruited through an online Qualtrics survey distributed as a Facebook advertisement from 3/19/21-4/30/21. We assumed that every participant is at risk of COVID-19 infection and should be able to get the vaccine with proper access. Bivariate and multivariable models were performed. Collinearity between variables was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 2,626 responses were generated and 2,259 were included in data analysis. According to our multivariate model analysis, vaccines were perceived as safe by those who had or planned to obtain full vaccination (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) (95% confidence interval) = 40.0 (19.0, 84.2); p< 0.0001) and those who indicated trust in science (aOR = 10.5 (5.1, 21.8); p< 0.0001); vaccines were perceived as not safe by those who self-identified as Republicans vs. self-identified Democrats (aOR = 0.2 (0.1, 0.5); p = 0.0020) and those with high school or lower education (aOR = 0.2 (0.1, 0.4); p = 0.0007). Similarly, according to our multivariate model analysis, the following groups were most likely to reject vaccination based on belief in vaccinations: those with lower income (aOR = 0.8 (0.6, 0.9); p = 0.0106), those who do not know anyone who had been vaccinated (aOR = 0.1 (0.1, 0.4); p< 0.0001), those who are unwilling to get vaccinated even if family and friends had done so (aOR = 0.1 (<0.1, 0.2); p< 0.0001), those who did not trust science (aOR < 0.1 (<0.1, 0.1); p< 0.0001), those who believe that vaccination was unnecessary if others had already been vaccinated (aOR = 2.8 (1.5, 5.1); p = 0.0007), and those who indicate refusal to vaccinate to help others (aOR = 0.1 (0.1, 0.2); p< 0.0001). An alpha of p<0.05 was used for all tests. CONCLUSION: Level of education and partisanship, but not race/ethnicity, were the most likely factors associated with vaccine hesitancy or likelihood to vaccinate. Also, low vaccination rates among underrepresented minorities may be due to distrust for healthcare industries. Population sub-groups less likely to be vaccinated and/or receptive to vaccines should be targeted for vaccine education and incentives.