Moser, Richard P.

Objective: During the past decade, the availability of health information online has increased dramatically. We assessed progress toward the Healthy People 2020 (HP2020) health communication and health information technology objective of increasing the proportion of health information seekers who easily access health information online. Methods: We used data from 4 administrations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2008-2017) (N = 18 103). We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis to evaluate trends over time in experiences with accessing health information and to examine differences by sociodemographic variables (sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, metropolitan status) separately for those who used the internet (vs other information sources) during their most recent search for health information. Results: Among US adults who looked for health information and used the internet for their most recent search, the percentage who reported accessing health information without frustration was stable during the study period (from 37.2% in 2008 to 38.5% in 2017). Accessing information online without frustration was significantly and independently associated with age 35-49 (vs age 18-34) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 -1.73), non-Hispanic black (vs non-Hispanic white) race/ethnicity (OR = 2.15; 95% CI, 1.55-2.97), and annual household income <$20 000 (vs >$75 000) (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93). The percentage of adults who used an information source other than the internet and reported accessing health information online without frustration ranged from 31.3% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2017. Survey year 2017 (vs 2008) (OR = 1.61; 95% CI, 1.09-2.35) and high school graduate education (vs college graduate) (OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.97) were significantly and independently associated with accessing health information without frustration from sources other than the internet. Conclusions: The percentage of online health information seekers reporting easily accessing health information did not meet the HP2020 objective. Continued efforts are needed to enable easy access to online health information among diverse populations.

Abstract In the United States, ionizing radiation from medical imaging is estimated to account for nearly half of the total radiation exposure among the general population. While controversial, some estimates suggest thousands of future cancer cases can be attributed to radiation from medical imaging. With the advancement in medical technologies, understanding the health risks of radiation from medical imaging has become increasingly complex for the average cancer patient. This complexity may shape the public’s perceptions of the potential cancer risks of medical imaging tests, including as x-rays, mammography, and radioactive dyes. Due to the enumerable, often misleading, sources of information available to the average consumer regarding the effect of radiation on general health, trends in risk perception need to be assessed. To investigate the association between perceptions of radiation exposure from medical imaging and cancer risk, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4, Cycle 2). HINTS is a probability-based nationally-representative survey which collects data on the American public’s knowledge, perception, and use of cancer- and health-related information since 2003. The data examined in the present study were collected between October 2012 and January 2013; (response rate = 39.97%). Bivariate analyses reveal individuals who perceive medical imaging radiation to be harmful to health are largely female, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, or non-Hispanic Asian, with less education and lower incomes. This perception is especially prevalent in individuals who self-report having a poor or fair general health and less confidence in their ability to take care of their own health. After adjusting for sociodemographic and health care factors, a significantly increased odds of believing radiation from medical imaging causes “some” or “a lot” of harm to health was found among those who have had a previous cancer diagnosis compared to those who did not (OR=1.67, 95%CI=1.18-2.35). Individuals who self-reported being Hispanic (OR=2.08, 95%CI=1.29-3.34), non-Hispanic Black (OR=1.54, 95%CI=1.09-2.19), and non-Hispanic Asian (OR=4.66, 95%CI=2.05-10.62) had significantly higher odds of perceiving “some” or ”a lot” of harm to health from medical imaging compared to non-Hispanic white counterparts. Our data reveal existing populations that perceive radiation from medical imaging is harmful to health. These perceptions, particularly among women and minorities, may affect the personal decisions of cancer care from individual patients. Future analyses may be useful to identify whether these perceptions alter health outcomes, especially related to frequency of patients declining cancer radiation therapy. Overall, understanding patient perceptions of radiation exposure and cancer risk may help guide conversation and education for physicians with their patients. Citation Format: Kekoa Taparra, Kay Pepin, Richard Moser, Bradford Hesse, Alexandra Greenberg. Examining sociodemographic disparities in perceptions of cancer risk from medical imaging radiation [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4222. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-4222

AbstractPurposeThe increase in use of health information technologies (HIT) presents new opportunities for patient engagement and self‐management. Patients in rural areas stand to benefit especially from increased access to health care tools and electronic communication with providers. We assessed the adoption of 4 HIT tools over time by rural or urban residency.MethodsAnalyses were conducted using data from 7 iterations of the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS; 2003‐2014). Rural/urban residency was based on the USDA's 2003 Rural‐Urban Continuum Codes. Outcomes of interest included managing personal health information online; whether providers maintain electronic health records (EHRs); e‐mailing health care providers; and purchasing medicine online. Bivariate analyses and logistic regression were used to assess relationships between geography and outcomes, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics.FindingsIn total, 6,043 (17.6%, weighted) of the 33,749 respondents across the 7 administrations of HINTS lived in rural areas. Rural participants were less likely to report regular access to Internet (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.61‐0.80). Rural respondents were neither more nor less likely to report that their health care providers maintained EHRs than were urban respondents; however, they had decreased odds of managing personal health information online (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.40‐0.78) and e‐mailing health care providers (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.49‐0.77).ConclusionsThe digital divide between rural and urban residents extends to HIT. Additional investigation is needed to determine whether the decreased use of HIT may be due to lack of Internet connectivity or awareness of these tools.

Abstract The increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, spurred largely by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid's EHR Meaningful Use Incentive Program, has potential to increase patient engagement and improve quality of healthcare delivered, especially for those diagnosed with cancer or other chronic conditions. Meaningful Use Stage 2 criteria require that providers give patients the ability to view, download and transmit their medical records; this is of particular importance for cancer patients, whose care is often delivered by teams of different specialists and for whom accurate communication of medical and treatment history between patients and providers is critical. To investigate whether there is a difference in patient access to and utilization of EHRs based on history of cancer diagnosis, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4, Cycle 4). The survey was fielded between July and November 2014 via postal mail; 3,370 complete surveys were returned (response rate = 34.4%). Of the respondents, 6.4% reported having a prior diagnosis of a cancer other than non-melanoma skin cancer. Among those with a self-reported history of cancer, 48.2% reported being offered access to their EHRs and 30.8% accessed their EHRs at least once, compared with those who did not have cancer (41.8% and 27.2%, respectively; p &gt; 0.05). After adjusting for sociodemographic and healthcare-related characteristics, no significant difference was found in the odds of being offered EHR access based on cancer diagnosis status. Those with a history of cancer had a statistically significantly higher odds of accessing their EHRs at least once compared to those without a diagnosis of cancer after adjustment, (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.08-2.81, p = 0.02). Other significant predictive factors included in the model were age, education, health insurance, having a regular provider, and internet access (p &lt; 0.05). A borderline association was also seen between a previous cancer diagnosis and increased frequency of EHR access (p = 0.08). These findings suggest that, if offered access to their records, those with a diagnosis of cancer have higher odds of using their EHRs; further investigation is needed to determine how patients are using EHRs to help manage their care, the impact of this use on cancer-specific outcomes, and associations with quality of care. Citation Format: Alexandra J. Greenberg, Angela Falisi, Lila J. Finney Rutten, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Richard P. Moser, Bradford W. Hesse. Cancer diagnoses and patient use of electronic health records: results from the health information national trends survey. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 2573.