Environmental sustainability and the human element: Decision making in National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers and Practice Greenhealth subscribing institutions

Background. Various aspects of sustainability have taken root in the hospital environment; however, decisions to pursue sustainable practices within the framework of a master plan are not fully developed in National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer centers and subscribing institutions to the Practice Greenhealth (PGH) listserv.^ Methods. This cross sectional study was designed to identify the organizational characteristics each study group pursed to implement sustainability practices, describe the barriers they encountered and reasons behind their choices for undertaking certain sustainability practices. A web-based questionnaire was pilot tested, and then sent out to 64 NCI-designated cancer centers and 1638 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv.^ Results. Complete responses were received from 39 NCI-designated cancer centers and 58 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv. NCI-designated cancer centers reported greater progress in integrating sustainability criteria into design and construction projects than hospitals of institutions subscribing to the PHG listserv (p-value = <0.05). Statistically significant differences were also identified between these two study groups in undertaking work life options, conducting energy usage assessments, developing energy conservation and optimization plans, implementing solid waste and hazardous waste minimization programs, using energy efficient vehicles and reporting sustainability progress to external stakeholders. NCI-designated cancer centers were further along in implementing these programs (p-value = <0.05). In comparing the self-identified NCI-designated cancer centers to centers that indicated they were both and NCI and PGH, the later had made greater progress in using their collective buying power to pursue sustainable purchasing practices within the medical community (p-value = <0.05). In both study groups, recycling programs were well developed.^ Conclusions. Employee involvement was viewed as the most important reason for both study groups to pursue recycling initiatives and incorporated environmental criteria into purchasing decisions. A written sustainability commitment did not readily translate into a high percentage that had developed a sustainability master plan. Coordination of sustainability programs through a designated sustainability professional was not being undertaken by a large number of institutions within each study group. This may be due to the current economic downturn or management's attention to the emerging health care legislation being debated in congress. ^ Lifecycle assessments, an element of a carbon footprint, are seen as emerging areas of opportunity for health care institutions that can be used to evaluate the total lifecycle costs of products and services.^

The care to share HIV disclosure study - the attitudes toward and beliefs about HIV disclosure among perinatally-infected HIV-positive youth and their caregivers

HIV incidence has not changed since the introduction of the pandemic. Daily 14,000 persons are infected with HIV and 25 to 50% of the HIV-infected population and subgroups respectively are estimated to be unaware of their HIV diagnosis. Perinatally-infected HIV-positive youth, aged 13-24 years, have survived unexpectedly into adulthood, have had unique HIV disclosure experiences and now face HIV disclosure issues of adulthood and perhaps parenthood. Despite new effective HIV therapies, no HIV prevention plan exists that has diminished the rate of new HIV infections. HIV stigma and lack of universal HIV reporting laws dissuade timely HIV disclosure. Missed HIV disclosure perpetuates HIV transmission and infection. Understanding the attitudes and beliefs of HIV disclosure among perinatally-infected HIV-positive youth and their caregivers may uncover reasons to HIV disclosure delays, avoidance and intentions. The Care to Share HIV Disclosure study was designed to identify the attitudes and beliefs of HIV disclosure among HIV-positve youth (aged 13-24 years), who were infected from birth and who knew their HIV diagnosis, along with their caregivers. Twenty-six participants (15 youth and 11 caregivers) completed the theory-based questionnaires of a 21-item multiple choice survey on HIV disclosure framed in the Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior and included an additional open-ended survey that applied the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping to address youth's and caregivers' HIV disclosure experiences. Youth were found to have a selective unfavorable HIV disclosure outcome when among referents of close friends. However youth did believe in HIV partner notification. For caregivers, it mattered who disclosed the HIV illness to the youth. HIV stigma was of concern based on the youths' tendency to believe in keeping HIV a secret and their caregivers' ambivalence to HIV secrecy. However, favorable HIV disclosure outcomes were identified for both youth and caregivers the potential for HIV disclosure: when seeking HIV knowledge, when around caregivers and close family and in situations of perceived controllability as when helping others learn about HIV. These findings unveil HIV disclosure attitudes and beliefs within this population and may reveal the attributes that may inhibit or promote HIV disclosure behaviors. HIV disclosure studies that address attitudes and beliefs among larger populations of youth and HIV-infected persons are necessary to identify effective individual, group and society approaches that would promote timely, responsible and meaningful HIV disclosure methods that promote a healthy identity and interrupt HIV transmission.^