Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Prim Care Community Health ; 13: 21501319221136361, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36448443

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine Influenza and COVID-19 vaccine concerns and uptake among adult patients in a Southern safety-net health system. METHODS: Trained research assistants conducted a structured telephone interview from April to October 2021. Of 118 participants, mean age was 57.7 years, 63.6% were female, 55.1% were Black, 42.4% white, and 54.2% reported rural residence. RESULTS: Among participants, 44.9% had received the influenza vaccine during the 2020 to 2021 season, and 66.1% had received the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants who received the influenza vaccine were more likely to report getting a COVID-19 vaccine compared to those who reported not getting a flu vaccine (81.1% vs 53.8%, P = .002). Black adults were significantly less likely than white adults (29.2% vs 46.0%, P = .048) and bordering on significance, males less likely than females (27.9% vs 41.3%, P = .054) to have reported receiving both vaccines. Of note, 25.4% of participants did not get either vaccine. The most common reasons for not getting the influenza vaccine were not being concerned about getting the flu (13.8%) and belief the vaccine gave them the flu (12.3%). The primary reasons for not getting a COVID-19 vaccine were concern about vaccine safety (22.5%), concern about side effects (20.0%), and belief they were not going to get sick (20.0%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings could help direct regional vaccine messaging and clinical communication to improve vaccine uptake among underserved populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Influenza Vaccines , Safety-net Providers , Vaccination , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(6)2022 Jun 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35746535

ABSTRACT

We examined COVID-19 concerns, vaccine acceptance, and trusted sources of information among patients in a safety-net health system in Louisiana. The participants were surveyed via structured telephone interviews over nine months in 2021. Of 204 adult participants, 65% were female, 52% were Black, 44.6% were White, and 46.5% were rural residents. The mean age was 53 years. The participants viewed COVID-19 as a serious public health threat (8.6 on 10-point scale). Black adults were more likely to perceive the virus as a threat than White adults (9.4 vs. 7.6 p < 0.0001), urban residents more than rural (9.0 vs. 8.2 p = 0.02), females more than males (8.9 vs. 8.1 p = 0.03). The majority (66.7%) had gotten the COVID-19 vaccine, with females being more likely than males (74.7 vs. 54.5% p = 0.02). There was no difference by race or rural residence. Overall, participants reported that physicians were the most trusted source of COVID-19 vaccine information (77.6%); followed by the CDC/FDA (50.5%), State Department of Health (41.4%), pharmacists (37.1%), nurses (36.7%); only 3.8% trusted social media. All sources were more trusted among black adults than White adults except family and social media. These findings could help inform efforts to design trustworthy public health messaging and clinical communication about the virus and vaccines.

3.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 113: 106654, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34906745

ABSTRACT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to decrease CRC mortality, yet significant disparities persist among those living in rural areas, from minority backgrounds, and those having low income. The purpose of this two-arm randomized controlled trial is to test the effectiveness and fidelity of a stepped care (increasing intensity as needed) approach to promoting 3-year adherence to CRC screening via fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy in rural community clinics serving high rates of low-income and minority patients. We hypothesize that, compared to enhanced usual care (EUC), patients receiving the multifaceted CRC screening intervention will demonstrate higher rates of CRC screening completion over 3 years. Participants from six federally qualified health centers (FQHCs; N = 1200 patients) serving predominately low-income populations in rural Louisiana will be randomized to the intervention or EUC arm. All participants will receive health literacy-directed CRC counseling, simplified materials about both the FIT and colonoscopy procedures, and motivational interviewing to aid in the determination of test preference. Participants in the intervention arm will also receive motivational reminder messages from their primary care provider (via audio recording or tailored text) for either a scheduled colonoscopy or return of a completed FIT. Participants in the EUC arm will receive the standard follow-up provided by their clinic or colonoscopy facility. The primary outcome will be completion of either colonoscopy or annual FIT over 3 years. Results will provide evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention to decrease disparities in CRC screening completion related to health literacy, race, and gender. Trial registration:Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT04313114.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Rural Population , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Community Health Centers , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Occult Blood
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...