Background: Despite its high prevalence and clinical significance, clinical measurement of lipoprotein(a) is rare but has not been systematically quantified. We assessed the prevalence of lipoprotein(a) testing overall, in those with various cardiovascular disease (CVD) conditions and in those undergoing cardiac testing across 6 academic medical centers associated with the University of California, in total and by year from 2012 to 2021. Methods and Results: In this observational study, data from the University of California Health Data Warehouse on the number of individuals with unique lipoprotein(a) testing, unique CVD diagnoses (using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ ICD‐10 ], codes), and other unique cardiac testing were collected. The proportion of total individuals, the proportion of individuals with a given CVD diagnosis, and the proportion of individuals with a given cardiac test and lipoprotein(a) testing any time during the study period were calculated. From 2012 to 2021, there were 5 553 654 unique adults evaluated in the University of California health system, of whom 18 972 (0.3%) had lipoprotein(a) testing. In general, those with lipoprotein(a) testing were more likely to be older, men, and White race, with a greater burden of CVD. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 6469 individuals with ischemic heart disease (2.9%), 836 with aortic stenosis (3.1%), 4623 with family history of CVD (3.3%), 1202 with stroke (1.7%), and 612 with coronary artery calcification (6.1%). For most conditions, the prevalence of testing in the same year as the diagnosis of CVD was relatively stable, with a small upward trend over time. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 10 753 individuals (1.8%) who had lipid panels, with higher rates with more specialized testing, including coronary computed tomography angiography (6.8%) and apolipoprotein B (63.0%). Conclusions: Lipoprotein(a) testing persists at low rates, even among those with diagnosed CVD, and remained relatively stable over the study period.

Objectives. To gain preliminary knowledge about issues identified by Native health investigators who would encourage greater community involvement in Indigenous health programs and research in Canada, Pacific Rim, and the United States. Design. A pilot/feasibility study, August 2001–April 2002. Setting. Indigenous health agencies and institutions in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the United States. Participants. Thirty-six health professionals from rural and urban health centers participated, which resulted in 10 group and four individual interviews. Subjects included program managers, clinical physicians, and health researchers. Approximately 58% of the subjects self-identified as Indigenous. Results. Three overarching themes emerged from the interview data: (i) integration of cultural values of family and community into health provision; (ii) emphasis on health education and prevention programs for Indigenous youth; and (iii) indigenous recognition and self-determination in health delivery and research. Conclusions. To improve and promote community involvement in primary health programs and services for Indigenous people involves a long-term social and political commitment to health protection on a national and an international level, as well as the understanding that research methodologies and health interventions must explicitly involve culturally appropriate values and behaviors that are implemented by Indigenous people.

Premature dropout from posttraumatic stress disorder treatment (PTSD) hinders treatment response. Studies have primarily used quantitative methodology to identify factors that contribute to Veterans' premature dropout, which has yielded mixed results. Qualitative methods provide rich data and generate additional hypotheses about why Veterans discontinue PTSD treatment. This study aimed to understand Veterans' reasons for dropping out of prolonged exposure therapy (PE) and to examine if there are differences in reasons for dropout between three delivery modalities: in-home, in-person (IHIP), office-based telehealth (OBT), or home-based telehealth (HBT). Twenty-two Veterans who dropped out of PE from a parent randomized clinical trial participated in individual qualitative interviews about potential contextual and individual factors related to discontinuation. Team-based coding was used to conduct open and focused coding. Themes were generated that described factors that influenced Veterans' dropout from PE and constant comparison was used to explore differences in reasons between the three modalities. Most Veterans had multiple reasons for dropping out and reasons were similar across delivery modalities with few differences. Practical barriers (e.g., scheduling difficulties), attitudes toward mental health providers and therapy (e.g., stigma), psychological and physical health factors (e.g., perceived worsening of symptoms, pain), and the therapeutic context (e.g., disliking aspects of PE) contributed to Veterans' decisions to drop out from PE. Veterans in OBT reported more types of practical barriers than Veterans in HBT and IHIP. These findings can help generate hypotheses about interventions that may promote engagement and future studies should continue to study how to reduce dropout. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Background: Younger breast cancer survivors consistently report a greater impact of their cancer experience on quality of life compared with older survivors, including higher rates of body image disturbances, sexual dysfunction, and fatigue. One potential strategy to improve quality of life is through physical activity, but this has been understudied in younger breast cancer survivors, who often decrease their activity during and after cancer treatment. Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility and acceptability of a technology-based, remotely delivered, peer-led physical activity intervention for younger breast cancer survivors. We will also assess the preliminary impact of the intervention on changes in physical activity and multiple aspects of quality of life. Methods: This study is a community-academic partnership between University of California, San Diego and Haus of Volta, a nonprofit organization that promotes positive self-image in younger breast cancer survivors. This ongoing pilot study aims to recruit 30 younger breast cancer survivors across the United States (6 months post primary cancer treatment, self-report <60 min of moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity [MVPA]) into a 3-month peer-delivered, fully remote exercise program. Participants will complete 6 biweekly video chat sessions with a trained peer mentor, a fellow younger breast cancer survivor. Participants will receive a Fitbit Charge 3; weekly feedback on Fitbit data from their peer mentor; and access to a private, in-app Fitbit Community to provide and receive support from other participants and all peer mentors. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, participants will complete quality of life questionnaires, and MVPA will be measured using the ActiGraph accelerometer. Feasibility and acceptability will be explored through a mixed methods approach (ie, quantitative questionnaires and qualitative interviews). Intervention delivery and adaptations by peer mentors will be tracked through peer mentor self-evaluations and reflections, review of video-recorded mentoring sessions, and monthly templated reflections by the research team. Results: Recruitment began in September 2019. As of February 2020, the physical activity intervention is ongoing. Final measures are expected to occur in summer 2020. Conclusions: This study explores the potential for physical activity to improve sexual function, body image, and fatigue, key quality of life issues in younger breast cancer survivors. Using peer mentors extends our reach into the young survivor community. The detailed process evaluation of intervention delivery and adaptations by mentors could inform a future hybrid-effectiveness implementation trial. Finally, remote delivery with commercially available technology could promote broader dissemination. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04064892; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04064892 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/18420

Mobile and tablet apps, ubiquitous and pervasive computing, wearable computing and domotics for health.