Perspectives from leadership and frontline staff on telehealth transitions in the Los Angeles safety net during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Objectives: The start of the COVID-19 pandemic led the Los Angeles safety net health system to dramatically reduce in-person visits and transition abruptly to telehealth/telemedicine services to deliver clinical care (remote telephone and video visits). However, safety net patients and the settings that serve them face a "digital divide" that could impact effective implementation of such digital care. The study objective was to examine attitudes and perspectives of leadership and frontline staff regarding telehealth integration in the Los Angeles safety net, with a focus on telemedicine video visits. Methods: This qualitative study took place in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS), the second-largest safety net health system in the US. This system disproportionately serves the uninsured, Medicaid, racial/ethnic minority, low-income, and Limited English Proficient (LEP) patient populations of Los Angeles County. Staff and leadership personnel from each of the five major LAC DHS hospital center clinics, and community-based clinics from the LAC DHS Ambulatory Care Network (ACN) were individually interviewed (video or phone calls), and discussions were recorded. Interview guides were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and included questions about the video visit technology platform and its usability, staff resources, clinic needs, and facilitators and barriers to general telehealth implementation and use. Interviews were analyzed for summary of major themes. Results: Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted in August to October 2020. Participants included LAC DHS physicians, nurses, medical assistants, and physical therapists with clinical and/or administrative roles. Narrative themes surrounding telehealth implementation, with video visits as the case study, were identified and then categorized at the patient, clinic (including provider), and health system levels. Conclusions: Patient, clinic, and health system level factors must be considered when disseminating telehealth services across the safety net. Participant discussions illustrated how multilevel facilitators and barriers influenced the feasibility of video visits and other telehealth encounters. Future research should explore proposed solutions from frontline stakeholders as testable interventions towards advancing equity in telehealth implementation: from patient training and support, to standardized workflows that leverage the expertise of multidisciplinary teams.

Electronic Health Literacy among Linguistically Diverse Patients in the Los Angeles County Safety Net Health System.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health (eHealth) literacy may affect telehealth uptake, yet few studies have evaluated eHealth literacy in underserved populations. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe technology access and use patterns as well as eHealth literacy levels among English-speaking and LEP patients in a Los Angeles safety net health system. METHODS: Patients, aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and/or hypertension, and their caregivers were recruited from three primary care safety-net clinics in Los Angeles County (California) between June - July 2017. Participants' electronic health literacy was assessed by the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS); participants were also asked about technology access and use. We examined these measures in English-speaking and limited English proficient (LEP) Spanish-speaking patients. RESULTS: A total of 71 participants (62 patients and 9 caregivers) completed the questionnaire. The mean age of the respondents was 56 years old. More than half of participants used a phone that could connect to the Internet (67%). The mean score for 10 eHEALS items was in the moderate range (26/50 points). There was no difference in mean eHEALS between language groups. However, 47% of Spanish-speaking participants "agreed/strongly agreed" that they knew how to use the Internet to answer their health questions, compared to 68% of English-speaking participants (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of patients from a diverse safety net population, perceived skills and confidence in engaging with electronic health systems were low, particularly among LEP Spanish-speakers, despite moderate levels of electronic health literacy. More studies are needed among diverse patient populations to better assess eHealth literacy and patients' digital readiness, and to examine how these patient metrics directly impact telehealth utilization.

Patient Portals to Support Palliative and End-of-Life Care: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Although patient portals are widely used for health promotion, little is known about the use of palliative care and end-of-life (PCEOL) portal tools available for patients and caregivers. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify and assess the user perspectives of PCEOL portal tools available to patients and caregivers described and evaluated in the literature. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of the academic literature directed by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) extension for Scoping Review and searched three databases. Sources were included if they reported the development or testing of a feature, resource, tool, or intervention; focused on at least one PCEOL domain defined by the National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative Care; targeted adults with serious illness or caregivers; and were offered via a patient portal tethered to an electronic medical record. We independently screened the titles and abstracts (n=796) for eligibility. Full-text (84/796, 10.6%) sources were reviewed. We abstracted descriptions of the portal tool name, content, targeted population, and reported user acceptability for each tool from included sources (n=19). RESULTS: In total, 19 articles describing 12 tools were included, addressing the following PCEOL domains: ethical or legal (n=5), physical (n=5), and psychological or psychiatric (n=2). No tools for bereavement or hospice care were identified. Studies have reported high acceptability of tools among users; however, few sources commented on usability among older adults. CONCLUSIONS: PCEOL patient portal tools are understudied. As medical care increasingly moves toward virtual platforms, future research should investigate the usability and acceptability of PCEOL patient portal resources and evaluate their impact on health outcomes.

Barriers to Recruitment and Adherence in a Randomized Controlled Diet and Exercise Weight Loss Intervention Among Minority Breast Cancer Survivors.

Minority recruitment to cancer trials is low and there are limited data on minority adherence to lifestyle modification interventions. We examined factors related to recruitment and adherence to a pilot weight loss intervention among Hispanic and black breast cancer survivors. Participants completed a detailed screening interview to assess barriers to enrollment. An index was created to assess adherence at 6 months. 112 potentially eligible women were identified; 66 consented and completed a screening interview. After screening, 9 were ineligible; 15 opted to not enroll; and 42 were randomized. Among eligible women, earlier stage at diagnosis, treatment type, and negative beliefs related to exercise and diet after diagnosis were negatively associated with study enrollment (P < 0.05). Self-reported barriers to adherence included fatigue, family responsibilities, illness, work, transportation, and negative perceptions of exercise and diet. Results from this study emphasize the need to adapt recruitment and adherence strategies to address these factors.

Perceived discrimination and cancer screening behaviors in US Hispanics: the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos Sociocultural Ancillary Study.

PURPOSE: Perceived discrimination has been associated with lower adherence to cancer screening guidelines. We examined whether perceived discrimination was associated with adherence to breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening guidelines in US Hispanic/Latino adults. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos Sociocultural Ancillary Study, including 5,313 Hispanic adults aged 18­74 from Bronx, NY, Chicago, IL, Miami, FL, and San Diego, CA, and those who were within appropriate age ranges for specific screening tests were included in the analysis. Cancer screening behaviors were assessed via self-report. Perceived discrimination was measured using the Perceived Ethnic Discrimination Questionnaire. Confounder-adjusted multivariable polytomous logistic regression models assessed the association between perceived discrimination and adherence to cancer screening guidelines. RESULTS: Among women eligible for screening, 72.1 % were adherent to cervical cancer screening guidelines and 71.3 %were adherent to breast cancer screening guidelines. In participants aged 50­74, 24.6 % of women and 27.0 % of men were adherent to fecal occult blood test guidelines; 43.5 % of women and 34.8 % of men were adherent to colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy guidelines; 41.0 % of men were adherent to prostate-specific antigen screening guidelines. Health insurance coverage, rather than perceived ethnic discrimination,was the variable most associated with receiving breast, cervical,colorectal, or prostate cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of discrimination as a barrier to cancer screening may be modest among Hispanics/Latinos in urban US regions. Having health insurance facilitates cancer screening in this population. Efforts to increase cancer screening in Hispanics/Latinos should focus on increasing access to these services, especially among the uninsured.

Dietary modifications, weight loss, and changes in metabolic markers affect global DNA methylation in Hispanic, African American, and Afro-Caribbean breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Lower levels of global DNA methylation in tissue and blood have been associated with increased cancer risk. Conversely, cross-sectional analyses of healthier lifestyle patterns have been associated with higher levels of global DNA methylation. OBJECTIVE: In this trial, we explored the associations between changes in lifestyle modifications (diet, weight loss), metabolic markers, and global epigenetic biomarkers in white blood cells. METHODS: Study participants were Hispanic, African American, and Afro-Caribbean overweight and sedentary female breast cancer survivors (n = 24) who participated in a larger randomized, crossover, pilot study of a 6-mo weight loss intervention and who had available blood specimens. Anthropometric measures, a food-frequency questionnaire, and peripheral blood were collected at baseline, 6 mo, and 12 mo. Plasma samples were analyzed for metabolic markers (insulin, glucose). We measured DNA methylation of long interspersed nucleotide element 1 (LINE-1) and satellite 2 by pyrosequencing and MethyLight, respectively, and global DNA methylation by the luminometric methylation assay (LUMA). RESULTS: DNA methylation of LINE-1 was statistically significantly elevated at 6 mo [75.5% vs. 78.5% (P < 0.0001)] and 12 mo [75.5% vs. 77.7% (P < 0.0001)], compared to baseline. Over a 12-mo period, changes in percentage body fat and plasma glucose concentrations were positively associated with LINE-1 DNA methylation (ß = 0.19, P = 0.001) and LUMA DNA methylation levels (ß = 0.24, P = 0.02), respectively. Similarly, 12-mo changes in dietary measures such as vegetable (ß = 0.009, P = 0.048), protein (ß = 0.04, P = 0.001), and total caloric (ß = 0.05, P = 0.01) intake were positively associated with changes in LUMA DNA methylation, as was intake of fruit positively associated with changes in LINE-1 DNA methylation (ß = 0.004, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our hypothesis-generating results suggest that lifestyle modifications may be associated with changes in global DNA methylation detectable at 6 and 12 mo. These biomarkers may be useful intermediate biomarkers to use in future intervention trials. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00811824.