Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed type of cancer among Latino men. Due, in part, to lower rates of screening and limited knowledge about prostate cancer, Latinos are almost four times as likely to be diagnosed at an advanced stage than non-Latino Whites. In this qualitative study, we sought to examine cultural and gender beliefs and how these influence Latino men's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors related to prostate cancer screening. Ten self-identified Latino men 45 years of age and older with no history of prostate cancer completed an in-depth individual interview and a survey. Three themes emerged from a grounded theory analysis of the interview data: (a) "Machismo is not wanting to get the exam," (b) "They're going to insert a finger!" and (c) promoting screenings: "You don't have to stop being macho." Participants' sense of manliness and perceptions of sexuality influenced how they processed and understood prostate cancer screening and how they made the consequent decision to get screened. Findings from this study can inform the development of health interventions that aim to promote informed prostate cancer screening decisions and reduce health disparities among this population.

Objective: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed form of cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death among Latina women in the United States. One aspect of recovery that has been underrepresented in the English-language literature is the recovery of Latina women who have developed lymphedema, a debilitating condition characterized by persistent swelling of the arm, hand, chest, and/or breast. To fill this research gap, a study was conducted to examine the lived experiences of Latina women with breast cancer-related lymphedema. Methods: Given the limited scholarship on this topic, qualitative methods were used to obtain a foundational and nuanced understanding of Latina women’s experiences. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of 10 Latina survivors with breast cancer-related lymphedema. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis and constant comparison methodology. Results: The data analysis yielded three major themes: knowledge of lymphedema, impact of lymphedema diagnosis, and coping with lymphedema. Participants had limited knowledge of lymphedema and its risk factors upon diagnosis, in addition to barriers accessing quality care. They also noted psychological distress related to a significant financial burden as well as social anxiety related to interacting with others while wearing compression gloves or sleeves. A major coping strategy was receiving social support from friends, family, peers in structured support groups, and spiritual/religious groups or practices. Conclusions: Our findings bring to light contextual factors that may place Latina breast cancer survivors at increased risk for lymphedema and for experiencing a high burden managing their condition. Recommendations are provided for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention.

In response to the call for new and innovative methods of assessing campus climate (Worthington, 2008), the current study is the first to examine the readiness of a Latina/o campus community to address lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) concerns. Using the Community Readiness Model, data were collected through individual interviews with a total of 16 students, staff, and faculty from programs and organizations serving the Latina/o campus community. The 6 dimensions assessed included climate, knowledge of LGB concerns, knowledge of LGB efforts, leadership, resources, and efforts. Findings suggest that there is a mismatch between the current Latina/o LGB programming and the Latina/o campus community’s stage of readiness to address LGB issues. Despite the fact that Latina/o LGB efforts had been developed for about a decade, the community was assessed to be at a vague awareness stage of readiness with regard to the dimensions of climate, knowledge of LGB concerns and efforts, and leadership. The resources dimension was found to be at the preplanning stage of readiness, whereas the efforts dimension was reported to be at the preparation stage by staff and faculty and at the initiation stage by students. Given the stage variability across dimensions, programming has to focus on the lowest stage of readiness obtained, namely vague awareness. Culturally sensitive recommendations for programming strategies that match the community’s stage of readiness are presented.

No abstract