BackgroundHispanics bear some of the highest burden of the obesity epidemic and the disparities gap is bigger among Hispanics in rural communities. This mixed methods study examined the objective and subjective assessment of food availability and food access in four rural, agricultural, and predominantly Hispanic communities.MethodsIn this convergent parallel mixed methods study, we used the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey (NEMS) of Food Stores and Restaurants to objectively assess 57 food stores and 69 restaurants in four rural agricultural communities in Washington State. To complement the objective assessment findings, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 community residents. The data were collected from 2013 to 2014. Frequencies and means were calculated for quantitative data and content analysis conducted for interview data.ResultsParticipants (n = 32) had a mean age of 35.6 (SD 6.2) years, were mostly women, uninsured, low income, and had less than a high school education. Grocery and convenience stores had low NEMS composite scores indicating low overall availability of food items, low quality, and high food prices. Composite scores for sit-down restaurants, fast casual restaurants, and fast-food restaurants were similarly low in all four towns indicating limited availability of healthier options. Semi-structured interviews revealed participants perceived high availability and accessibility of quality fresh produce. Most participants reported eating out regularly several times a week, frequenting restaurant chains that serve buffets or fast foods, and allowing children to make decisions regarding their own food choices.ConclusionsCommunity members’ perception of food availability and food access may be different from the objective assessment of food environment. This information can be used to inform community-wide interventions to address food environment in these rural communities.

No abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare provider and patient views from the same clinical settings on issues raised by low-socioeconomic status (SES) breast cancer survivors. Methods:We conducted qualitative interviews among two groups: low-SES breast cancer survivors (n = 37) and medical personnel (ie, physicians, nurses, and navigators; n = 8) who interact and serve with these patients from two geographically distinct low-resourced clinical settings. These semistructured qualitative interviews used grounded theory to identify several potential themes, such as finances, resources, and medical care. Transcripts were coded and summarized into themes. Results:We analyzed each type of interview data separately then compared patient and provider perspectives. From these qualitative interviews, we discovered that low-SES breast cancer survivors reported many unmet needs, including transportation, housing, health literacy, and language, among others. Providers reported that many of these needs are served by the extensive network of supports surrounding these patients. Conclusions:These results illustrate that low-SES breast cancer survivors have unique needs that differ from other breast cancer survivors. Many providers feel that these needs are being met, but patients have more diverse experiences. By better addressing the links between resource needs and low-SES breast cancer survivors, quality of life can be improved.

No abstract