Children of migratory agricultural workers: the ecological context of acute care for a mobile population of immigrant children

Migratory and seasonal agricultural workers fill the labor needs of United States farmers. Although migrant workers are a culturally and ethnically diverse population, presently, they are predominantly immigrants of Hispanic ethnicity. Migrant farm workers are increasingly young, financially impoverished, male, undocumented immigrants from Mexico. Families with children constitute 45% of this population. The ecological context of migrant children’s lives is characterized by poverty, social isolation, heightened inter- and intra-national mobility, limited protections from occupational safety and health legislation, and health access barriers. Moreover, the linkage of citizenship and immigration status to the receipt of public insurance and selected social services benefits has the potential to increase access barriers for migrant workers and their families. Despite these obvious vulnerabilities, few health services research studies address this population. Most of what is known relates to adults, with very little known about migrant children’s health services utilization patterns or health morbidities. In the emergency department setting, the differential approach required to care for children, as compared to adults, must be modified further in order to address the unique needs of this vulnerable population. The effective delivery of acute care to the children of migratory agricultural workers requires awareness of and attention to their unique health access barriers, issues of continuity and compliance with care, and their unique health and injury risks.     

Timely follow‐up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium

Timely follow‐up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow‐up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer‐specific recommendations for times to follow‐up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow‐up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow‐up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low‐resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199–216 . © 2018 American Cancer Society .     

Limitations in health care access and utilization among long‐term survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer

BACKGROUND:

Health care outcomes for long‐term survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer were compared with young adults without a cancer history, using the 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data.

METHODS:

Eligible participants were 20 to 39 years of age. There were N = 979 who self‐reported a cancer diagnosis between the ages of 15 to 34 years and were at least 5 years from diagnosis (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer). The remaining 67,216 participants with no cancer history were used as controls. Using multivariable regressions, relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were generated to examine the relationship of survivor status on indicators of poor health care (uninsured, no personal health care provider, no routine care, and avoiding seeing a doctor due to cost). Adjusted proportions were calculated by demographic groups. Results are weighted by Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey design.

RESULTS:

Although the proportion uninsured did not differ (21% of survivors vs 23% of controls), AYA survivors reported forgoing care due to cost at higher levels than controls (relative risk = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.44‐1.94). Cost barriers were particularly high for survivors aged 20 to 29 years (44% vs 16% of controls; P < .001) and female survivors (35% vs 18% of controls; P < .001). Survivors reporting poorer health had more cost barriers. Moreover, uninsured survivors tended to report lower use of health care than did controls.

CONCLUSIONS:

AYA cancer survivors may forgo health care due to cost barriers, potentially inhibiting the early detection of late effects. Expanding health insurance coverage for young cancer survivors may be insufficient without adequate strategies to reduce their medical cost burdens. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Recent progress in understanding,diagnosing, and treating hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the few cancers in which a continued increase in incidence has been observed over several years. As such, there has been a focus on safe and accurate diagnosis and the development of treatment algorithms that take into consideration the unique complexities of this patient population. In the past decade, there have been improvements in nonsurgical treatment platforms and better standardization with respect to the diagnosis and patient eligibility for liver transplant. How to navigate patients through the challenges of treatment is difficult and depends on several factors: 1) patient‐related variables such as comorbid conditions that influence treatment eligibility; 2) liver‐related variables such as Child‐Pugh score; and 3) tumor‐related variables such as size, number, pattern of spread within the liver, and vascular involvement. The objectives of this review are to put into perspective the current treatment options for patients with HCC, the unique advantages and disadvantages of each treatment approach, and the evidence that supports the introduction of sorafenib into the multidisciplinary management of HCC. CA Cancer J Clin 2012;. © 2012 American Cancer Society.