Investigating the association between discrimination, internalizing symptoms, and alcohol use among Latino/a immigrants in the United States.

Internalizing symptoms associated with anxiety and depression have been correlated with harmful alcohol use among Latino/as, but little attention has been paid to assessing the association between perceived discrimination and harmful alcohol use. The present study was designed to investigate the association between perceived discrimination, internalizing symptoms associated with anxiety and depression, and harmful alcohol use among Latino/a immigrants living in the United States (US). Our sample included 426 Latino/a immigrants. Their mean age was 40.05 years (SD = 6.50), 65.50% were women, 80.00% had a partner, 54.20% lived on less than $2,000 a month, and 41.50% reported having attained a college degree. Perceived discrimination was assessed using the Perceived Discrimination Scale, anxious symptoms were assessed using the GAD-7, depressive symptoms were assessed using the CES-D short form, and harmful alcohol use was assessed using AUDIT. We estimated a linear regression model using cross-sectional, self-reported data. The model was statistically significant, R 2 = 0.38, F (8, 425) = 32.09, p < 0.01. Discrimination was significantly associated with AUDIT scores, (ß = 0.21, p < 0.01) after accounting for covariates and for symptoms of anxiety and depression. Our results indicate that experiences of discrimination in the US are associated with increased harmful alcohol use even after controlling for other variables. These findings may be useful in designing coping interventions specifically for Latino/a immigrants to reduce the risk of alcohol use disorder. This study also has political and public health implications for acknowledging the detrimental health consequences of experiencing discrimination, providing support to the position that reducing racism and discrimination represent important public health priorities.

Mixed-methods analysis of satisfaction during a 12-session mindfulness-based intervention for women with a substance use disorder and trauma symptomatology.

Satisfaction with an intervention influences the uptake of behavior changes and the long-term efficacy of the intervention. Therefore, it is crucial to assess satisfaction by participant profile when creating and adapting behavior interventions for minoritized populations. Qualitative and quantitative data on participant trauma symptom severity and intervention satisfaction were collected through self-report surveys from 54 women. The sample was 59.3% Hispanic, with an average age of 33.21 (SD = 10.42), who were in residential treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) and participated in a 12-session mindfulness-based intervention. Qualitative responses were coded using thematic analysis, and an integrative mixed-methods approach was used to compare qualitative theme frequency between high-trauma (N = 28) and low-trauma (N = 26) groups at session 2 and session 11. High- and low-trauma groups were determined by interquartile ranges (bottom 25% = low; top 75% = high). In session 2, the low-trauma group reported significantly higher satisfaction (M = 4.20, SD = 0.55) than the high-trauma group (M = 3.77, SD = 0.89); t(43) = 1.90, p = 0.03. In session 11, there was no significant difference between groups. The mixed-methods analysis revealed that "trouble focusing" appeared more frequently in the high-trauma group than in the low-trauma group during session 2, but the theme was not present in either group at session 11, suggesting that this might pose an initial barrier for individuals with high trauma but subsides as the intervention progresses. This speaks to the importance of retention strategies tailored for participants with SUDs and high trauma while they adjust to the intervention. Assessing initial challenges with satisfaction may help facilitators intervene to increase participant satisfaction.

Cultivating Relationship-Centered Care: Patient, Caregiver, and Provider Communication Preferences for and Experiences with Prognostic Conversations.

Prognostic conversations present many challenges for patients, caregivers, and providers alike. Most research examining the context of prognostic conversations have used a more siloed approach to gather the range of perspectives of those involved, typically through the lens of patient-centered care. However, the mutual influence evident in prognostic conversations suggests a relationship-centered care model may be useful in cancer communication research. Similarities and differences in preferences for and experiences with prognostic conversations among oncology patients, caregivers, and providers (N = 32) were explored. Identified themes were then mapped to the principles of the relationship-centered care framework to extend our understanding of prognostic conversations and contribute to a new direction in the application of relationship-centered care. Findings suggest fewer similarities than differences, point to important discrepancies among participant perspectives, and reinforce the utility of relationship-centered care in identifying communication practices that enhance the prognostic conversation experience.