Vietnamese American men are over 10 times more likely to be diagnosed with liver cancer than their white counterparts. This health disparity is attributable to high rates of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Our study objective was to examine factors associated with HBV testing among Vietnamese men. A population-based survey was conducted in Seattle. The questionnaire content was guided by an earlier qualitative study and the Health Behavior Framework. The survey was completed by 345 men (response rate: 80%). About one-third (34%) of the respondents reported they had not been tested for HBV. The following factors were associated (P < 0.01) with previous testing in bivariate comparisons: having a regular source of care and regular provider; knowing that HBV can be spread during childbirth; believing HBV can cause liver cancer; and doctor(s) had recommended testing as well as had asked doctor(s) for testing. Three variables were independently associated with HBV testing in a logistic regression model: regular source of care (OR = 4.5; 95% CI = 2.6-7.9), physician recommendation (OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.3-4.0), and knowing HBV can be spread during childbirth (OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-3.9). Low levels of HBV testing remain a public health problem in some Vietnamese American sub-groups. Health education about HBV transmission may stimulate patients to seek testing. Intervention programs should specifically target Vietnamese men without a regular source of health care and physicians who serve Vietnamese communities.

Southeast Asians have higher rates of liver cancer than any other racial/ethnic group in the United States. Chronic carriage of hepatitis B virus (HBV) is the most common underlying cause of liver cancer in the majority of Asian populations. Our objectives were to describe Vietnamese Americans' awareness of hepatitis B, levels of HBV testing, and knowledge about hepatitis B transmission; and to compare the HBV knowledge and practices of men and women. A community-based, in-person survey of Vietnamese men and women was conducted in Seattle during 2002. Seven hundred and fifteen individuals (345 men and 370 women) completed the questionnaire. Eighty-one percent of the respondents had heard of hepatitis B (76% of men, 86% of women) and 67% reported HBV testing (66% of men, 68% of women). A majority of the participants knew that HBV can be transmitted during sexual intercourse (71% of men, 68% of women), by sharing toothbrushes (67% of men, 77% of women), and by sharing razors (59% of men, 67% of women). Less than one-half knew that hepatitis B is not spread by eating food prepared by an infected person (46% of men, 27% of women), nor by coughing (39% of men, 25% of women). One-third of our respondents did not recall being tested for HBV. Important knowledge deficits about routes of hepatitis B transmission were identified. Continued efforts should be made to develop and implement hepatitis B educational campaigns for Vietnamese immigrant communities. These efforts might be tailored to male and female audiences.

Health Technology Assessment is indexed in Index Medicus/MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica/ EMBASE. Copies of the Executive Summaries are available from the NCCHTA web site (see overleaf). NHS R&D HTA Programme T he overall aim of the NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme is to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and work in the NHS. Research is undertaken in those areas where the evidence will lead to the greatest benefits to patients, either through improved patient outcomes or the most efficient use of NHS resources. The Standing Group on Health Technology advises on national priorities for health technology assessment. Six advisory panels assist the Standing Group in identifying and prioritising projects. These priorities are then considered by the HTA Commissioning Board supported by the National Coordinating Centre for HTA (NCCHTA). This report is one of a series covering acute care, diagnostics and imaging, methodology, pharmaceuticals, population screening, and primary and community care. It was identified as a priority by the Methodology Panel and funded as project number 93/41/02. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Standing Group, the Commissioning Board, the Panel members or the Department of Health. The editors wish to emphasise that funding and publication of this research by the NHS should not be taken as implicit support for the recommendations for policy contained herein. In particular, policy options in the area of screening will, in England, be considered by the National Screening Committee. This Committee, chaired by the Chief Medical Officer, will take into account the views expressed here, further available evidence and other relevant considerations. Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search, appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others.

These results provide insights for physicians about how to improve end-of-life discussions with language-discordant patients and their families. Interpreter recommendations provide physicians and health care organizations with specific tools that may improve quality of communication about end-of-life discussions.