Background: Geographic disparities in access to palliative care cause unnecessary suffering near the end-of-life in low-access U.S. states. The psychological mechanisms accounting for state-level variation are poorly understood. Objective: To examine whether statewide differences in personality account for variation in palliative care access. Design: We combined 5 state-level datasets that included the 50 states and national capital. Palliative care access was measured by the Center to Advance Palliative Care 2015 state-by-state report card. State-level personality differences in openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, and extraversion were identified in a report on 619,387 adults. The Census and Gallup provided covariate data. Regression analyses examined whether state-level personality predicted state-level palliative care access, controlling for population size, age, gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and political views. Sensitivity analyses controlled for rurality, nonprofit status, and hospital size. Results: Palliative care access was higher in states that were older, less racially diverse, higher in socioeconomic status, more liberal, and, as hypothesized, higher in openness. In regression analyses accounting for all predictors and covariates, higher openness continued to account for better state-level access to palliative care (b = 0.428, p = 0.008). Agreeableness also emerged as predicting better access. In sensitivity analyses, personality findings persisted, and less rural states and those with more nonprofits had better access. Conclusions: Palliative care access is worse in states lower in openness, meaning where residents are more skeptical, traditional, and concrete. Personality theory offers recommendations for palliative care advocates communicating with administrators, legislators, philanthropists, and patients to expand access in low-openness states.

57 Background: There are geographic disparities in access to palliative care that cause unnecessary suffering near the end of life in low-access U.S. states. The psychological mechanisms explaining state-by-state variation in access to palliative care are poorly understood. Our objective was to examine whether state-level differences in personality explain state-by-state variation in palliative care access. Methods: We combined four datasets with state-level data for the 50 U.S. states and the national capitol. Palliative care access was measured by the Center to Advance Palliative Care 2015 state-by-state report card. Statewide personality differences were identified from a report on 619,387 adults who completed the well-validated Big Five Inventory, which assesses the five core personality dimensions: openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, and extraversion. The U.S. Census and Gallup provided data on covariates. Regression analyses examined whether state-level differences in personality predicted statewide access to palliative care, controlling for differences in population size, age, gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and political views. Results: Access to palliative care was worse in states that were younger, more racially diverse, lower in socioeconomic status, more politically conservative, and lower in openness. In regression analyses that simultaneously accounted for all predictors and covariates, only lower openness continued to explain worse state-level access to palliative care (β = 0.428, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Palliative care access is worse in states where people are lower in openness, meaning residents who are more skeptical, traditional, and concrete. Personality theory offers specific recommendations for palliative care advocates communicating with hospital administrators, legislators, philanthropists, and patients to expand access in low-openness states.

Tobacco use is a leading preventable cause of early mortality and is prevalent among adults with mental health diagnoses, especially in the southern USA. Increasing cessation resources in outpatient mental health care and targeting individuals most receptive to changing their behavior may improve cessation. Drawing on the transtheoretical model, our goals were to develop an educational video about the Louisiana Tobacco Quitline and evaluate its acceptability. We designed the video with knowledge derived from Louisiana-specific data (2016 Louisiana Adult Tobacco Survey, N = 6,469) and stakeholder feedback. Bivariate associations between demographic/tobacco-use characteristics and participants’ stage of quitting (preparation phase vs. nonpreparation phase) were conducted, which informed design elements of the video. Four stakeholder advisory board meetings involving current smokers, mental health clinicians, and public health advocates convened to provide iterative feedback on the intervention. Our stakeholder advisory board (n = 10) and external stakeholders (n = 20) evaluated intervention acceptability. We found that 17.9% of Louisiana adults were current smokers, with 46.9% of them in the preparation phase of quitting. Using insights from data and stakeholders, we succeeded in producing a 2-min video about the Louisiana Tobacco Quitline which incorporated three themes identified as important by stakeholders: positivity, relatability, and approachability. Supporting acceptability, 96.7% of stakeholders rated the video as helpful and engaging. This study demonstrates the acceptability of combining theory, existing data, and iterative stakeholder feedback to develop a quitline educational video. Future research should examine whether the video can be used to reduce tobacco use.

34 Background: Palliative care is underutilized by patients with cancer. Understanding differences in preferences is critical for promoting access. This study tested the hypothesis that women would be more favorably disposed toward palliative care than men. Methods: Two samples of individuals with cancer ( N = 633 and N = 413) provided data on demographics and self-reported health and completed the Palliative Care Preferences Scale, a multifaceted assessment that measures emotional, cognitive, and behavioral aspects of preferences. We conducted t-tests to examine gender differences in palliative preferences in each sample, and analysis of covariance to examine the difference while controlling for age, race/ethnicity, education, cancer type, time since diagnosis, and presence of metastases. Results: As hypothesized, t-tests revealed a significant difference of palliative care preferences across gender for both samples ( p < .001 and p = .020) with women preferring palliative care more so than men. Findings were comparable when controlling for age, race/ethnicity, education, cancer type, time since diagnosis, and presence of metastases ( p = .018 and p = .015). Analysis of the cognitive subscale revealed that relative to men, women viewed palliative care as more efficacious ( p < .001 and p < .001). Conclusions: Findings across the two samples demonstrate greater preferences for palliative care among women than men. Future research should examine whether psychoeducational interventions can be tailored based on gender to increase preferences for palliative care.