Abstract C125: Identifying barriers to follow-up colonoscopy completion after an abnormal fecal test: Interviews with gastroenterology staff

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are an accepted way to identify patients at risk for CRC. However, patients who receive an abnormal FIT result must obtain a follow-up colonoscopy. Rates of follow-up colonoscopy are low in most healthcare settings, particularly in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). FQHC patients who need a follow-up colonoscopy must undergo several steps, including obtaining a referral to a gastroenterology specialist (GIs), and preparing for and attending the procedure. Interventions such as patient navigation may improve follow-up colonoscopy adherence for FQHC patients, yet little is known about the system-level barriers to the colonoscopy process. Methods As part of the Predicting and Addressing Colonoscopy Non-adherence in Community Settings (PRECISE) study, we interviewed care coordinators and GIs who receive referrals from local FQHCs for follow-up colonoscopies from abnormal FIT tests. Our goal was to understand their referral processes and what they perceive to be the primary barriers for patients completing the follow-up colonoscopy. Two trained qualitative staff conducted the interviews by telephone, and content analyzed the data from interview notes and transcribed recordings. Results We interviewed 12 GI and care coordinator staff across 7 different GI practices. Six of the seven GI practices attempted to facilitate the follow-up colonoscopy by not making a pre-procedure visit mandatory but rather allowing completion by telephone, if the patient is healthy and of low risk. Most GI practices identified using the same type of bowel preparation with community referred patients as it is inexpensive, covered by most insurance plans, and considered safe. The greatest barrier to colonoscopy completion by referred community patients stated by all GI practices was not having transportation to and from the appointment or understanding the need for an escort to be present, particularly at the completion of the colonoscopy. Lack of understanding the bowel preparation process was also a very common barrier, including when to start the process, what foods to avoid, and the need to consume the entire preparation. Faxed referrals from FQHCs lacking proper documentation of the abnormal FIT or incomplete patient medical information for the referral was also cited as hindrances to timely follow-up colonoscopy completion. Most GI practices reported limited resources and time for helping patients address structural challenges pertaining to transportation, escorts, or a private place to complete the preparation. Conclusion Our findings identify key areas where patient navigated efforts are needed, and inform the educational and structural challenges facing FQHC patients when interfacing with GI specialists for a follow-up colonoscopy. These findings can further inform the design and implementation of patient navigation programs in the community health center setting.

Citation Format: Jennifer S Rivelli, Jennifer L Schneider, Jamie H Thompson, Amanda F Petrik, DeeDee Torres, Gloria D Coronado. Identifying barriers to follow-up colonoscopy completion after an abnormal fecal test: Interviews with gastroenterology staff [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2019 Sep 20-23; San Francisco, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(6 Suppl_2):Abstract nr C125.

Abstract B019: Estimating the costs and cost-effectiveness of promoting mammography screening among US-based Latinas

Purpose: We characterize the costs and cost-effectiveness of a community health worker (CHW)-based intervention to promote screening mammography among US-based non-adherent Latinas. Methods: The parent study was a randomized controlled trial for 536 Latinas aged 42-74 years old who had sought care within a safety net health center in Western Washington. Participants were block-randomized within clinic to the control arm (usual care) or intervention arm (CHW-led motivational interviewing intervention). We used the perspective of the organization implementing promotional activities to characterize costs and cost-effectiveness. Cost data were categorized as program set-up and maintenance (initial training, booster/annual training) program implementation (administrative activities, intervention delivery); and, overhead/miscellaneous expenses. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost of screening for each additional woman screened between the intervention and control arms. Results: The respective costs per participant for standard care and the intervention arm were $69.96 and $300.99. Most costs pertained to program implementation and administrative activities specifically. The incremental cost per additional woman screened was $2,595.32. Conclusions: Our findings are within the ranges of costs and cost-effectiveness for other CHW programs to promote screening mammography among underserved populations. Our strong study design and focus on non-adherent women provides important strengths to this body of work, especially given implementation and dissemination science efforts regarding CHW-based health promotion for health disparity populations.

Citation Format: Catherine M Pichardo, Yamilé Molina, Donald L Patrick, Scott D Ramsey, Sonia Bishop, Shirley A.A. Beresford, Gloria D Coronado. Estimating the costs and cost-effectiveness of promoting mammography screening among US-based Latinas [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2019 Sep 20-23; San Francisco, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(6 Suppl_2):Abstract nr B019.

Challenges in Reaching Medicaid and Medicare Enrollees in a Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test Program

BeneFIT was a demonstration project that worked with a Medicaid/Medicare health plan to implement a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) program. The goal was to reach age-eligible enrollees who were due for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and prompt them to complete a FIT. One health insurance plan collaborated with six federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Oregon. Reach was defined as the percent of eligible individuals overdue for CRC screening who were mailed a FIT in 2016. We examined patient-level factors associated with reach, using multivariable log binomial regression and FIT completion rates at 6 months. The health plan identified 3386 age-eligible members overdue for CRC screening. Of these, 2615 (77.2%) were reached (mailed FIT kits) and 771 (22.8%) were not; 478 (14.1%) because they were not considered to be clinic patients and 290 (8.6%) because of mailing issues. Patient-level factors associated with not being reached were: being male, being Medicaid-insured (vs. Medicare), and having no primary care visits (vs. 4+ visits) in the last year. Among all enrollees identified as overdue for CRC screening, FIT completion rates at 6 months were 14.8% overall and 18.5% in the subgroup reached. In a mailed FIT program, a health insurance plan attempted to reach as many enrollees overdue for CRC screening as possible, however 22.8% were not mailed a FIT. Additional efforts are needed to ensure that the hardest to reach enrollees can participate in CRC screening.

First-year implementation of mailed FIT colorectal cancer screening programs in two Medicaid/Medicare health insurance plans: qualitative learnings from health plan quality improvement staff and leaders

Background

Colorectal cancer screening rates remain low, especially among certain racial and ethnic groups and the uninsured and Medicaid insured. Clinics and health care systems have adopted population-based mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) programs to increase screening, and now health insurance plans are beginning to implement mailed FIT programs. We report on challenges to and successes of mailed FIT programs during their first year of implementation in two health plans serving Medicaid and dual eligible Medicaid/Medicare enrollees.

Methods

This qualitative descriptive study gathered data through in-depth interviews with staff and leaders at each health plan (n = 10). The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, field notes from program planning meetings between the research team and the health plans, and internal research team debriefs informed interview guide development. Qualitative research staff used Atlas.ti to code the health plan interviews and develop summary themes through an iterative content analysis approach.

Results

We identified first-year implementation challenges in five thematic areas: 1) program design, 2) vendor experience, 3) engagement/communication, 4) reaction/satisfaction of stakeholders, and 5) processing/returning of mailed kits. Commonly experienced challenges by both health plans related to the time-consuming nature of the programs to set up, and complexities and delays in working with vendors. We found implementation successes in the same five thematic areas as well as four additional areas of: 1) leadership support, 2) compatibility with the health plan, 3) broader impacts, and 4) collaboration with researchers. Commonly experienced successes included the ability to adapt the mailed FIT program to the individual health plan culture and needs, and the synchronicity between the programs and their organizational missions and goals.

Conclusions

Both health plans successfully adapted mailed FIT programs to their own culture and resources and used their strong quality management resources to maximize success in overcoming the time demands of setting up the program and working with their vendors. Mailed FIT programs administered by health plans, especially those serving Medicaid- and dual eligible Medicaid/Medicare-insured populations, may be an important resource to support closing gaps in colorectal cancer screening among traditionally underserved populations.

Prospective Cohort study of Predictors of Follow-Up Diagnostic Colonoscopy from a Pragmatic Trial of FIT Screening

The goal of this study was to explore diagnostic colonoscopy completion in adults with abnormal screening fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. This was a secondary analysis of the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (Stop CRC) study, a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial to increase uptake of CRC screening in federally qualified community health clinics. Diagnostic colonoscopy completion and reasons for non-completion were ascertained through a manual review of electronic health records, and completion was compared across a wide range of individual patient health and sociodemographic characteristics. Among 2,018 adults with an abnormal FIT result, 1066 (52.8%) completed a follow-up colonoscopy within 12 months. Completion was generally similar across a wide range of participant subpopulations; however, completion was higher for participants who were younger, Hispanic, Spanish-speaking, and had zero or one of the Charlson medical comorbidities, compared to their counterparts. Neighborhood-level predictors were not associated with diagnostic colonoscopy completion. Thus, completion of a diagnostic colonoscopy was relatively low in a large sample of community health clinic adults who had an abnormal screening FIT result. While completion was generally similar across a wide range of characteristics, younger, healthier, Hispanic participants tended to have a higher likelihood of completion.

Initiation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Medicaid Enrollees

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have explored how individual- and practice-level factors influence colorectal cancer screening initiation among Medicaid enrollees newly age eligible for colorectal cancer screening (i.e., turning 50 years). This study explored colorectal cancer screening initiation among newly age-eligible Medicaid enrollees in Oregon.

METHODS

Medicaid claims data (January 2013 to June 2015) were used to conduct multivariable logistic regression (in 2018 and 2019) to explore individual- and practice-level factors associated with colorectal cancer screening initiation among 9,032 Medicaid enrollees.

RESULTS

A total of 17% of Medicaid enrollees initiated colorectal cancer screening; of these, 64% received a colonoscopy (versus fecal testing). Colorectal cancer screening initiation was positively associated with turning 50 years in 2014 (versus 2013; OR=1.21), being Hispanic (versus non-Hispanic white; OR=1.41), urban residence (versus rural; OR=1.23), and having 4 to 7 (OR=1.90) and 8 or more (OR=2.64) primary care visits compared with 1 to 3 visits in the year after turning 50 years. Having 3 or more comorbidities was inversely associated with initiation (OR=0.75). The odds of screening initiation were also higher for practices with 3 to 4 (OR=1.26) and 8 or more (OR=1.34) providers compared with 1 to 2 providers, and negatively associated with percentage of Medicaid panel age eligible for colorectal cancer screening (OR=0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Both individual- and practice-level factors are associated with disparities in colorectal cancer screening initiation among Oregon Medicaid enrollees. Future work promoting colorectal cancer screening might focus on additional barriers to the timely initiation of colorectal cancer screening and explore the effect of practice in-reach and population outreach strategies.

Patient randomized trial of a targeted navigation program to improve rates of follow-up colonoscopy in community health centers

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is an accessible and cost-effective strategy to lower CRC incidence and mortality. However, this mode of screening depends on follow-up colonoscopy after a positive FIT result. Unfortunately, nearly one-half of FIT-positive patients fail to complete this essential screening component. Patient navigation may improve follow-up colonoscopy adherence. To deliver patient navigation cost-effectively, health centers could target navigation to patients who are unlikely to complete the procedure on their own.

OBJECTIVES

The Predicting and Addressing Colonoscopy Non-adherence in Community Settings (PRECISE) clinical trial will validate a risk model of follow-up colonoscopy adherence and test whether patient navigation raises rates of colonoscopy adherence overall and among patients in each probability stratum (low, moderate, and high probability of adherence without intervention).

METHODS

PRECISE is a collaboration with a large community health center whose patient population is 37% Latino. Eligible patients will be aged 50-75, have an abnormal FIT result in the past month, and be due for a follow-up colonoscopy. Patients will be randomized to patient navigation or usual care. Primary outcomes will be colonoscopy completion within one year of a positive FIT result, cost, and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes will include time to colonoscopy receipt, adequacy of bowel prep, and communication of results to primary care providers. Primary and secondary outcomes will be reported overall and by probability stratum.

DISCUSSION

This innovative clinical trial will test the effectiveness and financial feasibility of using a precision health intervention to improve CRC screening completion in community health centers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Clinical Trial (NCT) Identifier: NCT03925883.

Moderators of the effectiveness of an intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening through mailed fecal immunochemical test kits: results from a pragmatic randomized trial

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain suboptimal, particularly in low-income and underserved populations. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) may overcome common barriers to screening; however, the effect of mailed FIT kits may differ across important subpopulations. The goal of the current study was to examine sociodemographic and health-related factors that moderate the effect of an intervention of automated direct mail of FIT kits at health clinics serving low-income populations.

Methods

This study is a secondary analysis of the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) study, a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial to increase uptake of CRC screening in patients seen at federally qualified health centers. The intervention involved tools embedded in the electronic medical records to enable participating clinics to mail FIT kits and related materials to eligible participants. We examined the rate of FIT completion by potential moderating characteristics using electronic health record data supplemented by the American Community Survey and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Geographic Variation datasets, linked via geocoding to patients’ addresses. All patients aged 50–75 seen in participating health clinics who were eligible for CRC screening were included.

Results

Although not always statistically significant, we saw a consistent pattern of increased FIT return rates among intervention participants compared to control participants across all subgroups studied, with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) generally ranging from 1.25 to 1.50. FIT completion in the intervention group ranged from 15 and 20% across subpopulations, typically three to six percentage points higher than the control group participants. The only moderator with a statistically significant interaction was race: persons of Asian descent showed a twofold response to the intervention (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.41 to 3.00).

Conclusions

Response to a mailed FIT intervention was generally consistent across a wide range of individual and neighborhood-level patient characteristics, including typically underserved patients and those in low-resource communities.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01742065. Registered on 5 December 2012.

A Survey of Provider Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceived Barriers Regarding a Centralized Direct-Mail Colorectal Cancer Screening Approach at Community Health Centers

Background: Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) rates are low, particularly among individuals with low socioeconomic status. Organized CRC screening programs have demonstrated success in increasing screening rates. Little is known about provider attitudes, beliefs, and practices related to CRC screening or how they are influenced by an organized CRC screening program. Methods: In 2014 and 2016, providers from 26 safety net clinics in Oregon and Northern California were invited to complete baseline and follow-up online surveys for the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) study. The provider survey link was sent electronically to primary care providers serving adult patients. Providers were sent reminders every 2 weeks via email to complete the survey, up to 3 reminders total. In this article, we describe learnings about provider attitudes, beliefs, and practices related to CRC screening after implementation of the STOP CRC program. Results: A total of 166 unique providers completed baseline and/or follow-up surveys, representing 228 responses. Main themes included (1) favorable shifts in attitude toward fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and direct-mail cancer screening programs, (2) changes in provider perception of key barriers, and (3) growing interest in centralized automated systems for identifying patients due for CRC screening and eligible for population-based outreach. Discussion: Providers are interested in improved information systems for identifying patients due for CRC screening and delivering population-based outreach (ie, to distribute FIT kits outside of the clinic visit) to help reduce health system- and patient-level barriers to screening. Trial Registration: National Clinical Trial (NCT) Identifier NCT01742065.

Direct-to-member mailed colorectal cancer screening outreach for Medicaid and Medicare enrollees: Implementation and effectiveness outcomes from the BeneFIT study

Background

Colorectal cancer screening uptake is low, particularly among individuals enrolled in Medicaid. To the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding the effectiveness of direct‐to‐member outreach by Medicaid health insurance plans to raise colorectal cancer screening use, nor how best to deliver such outreach.

Methods

BeneFIT is a hybrid implementation‐effectiveness study of 2 program models that health plans developed for a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) intervention. The programs differed with regard to whether they used a centralized approach (Health Plan Washington) or collaborated with health centers (Health Plan Oregon). The primary implementation outcome of the current study was the percentage of eligible enrollees to whom the plans delivered each intervention component. The primary effectiveness outcome was the rate of FIT completion within 6 months of mailing of the introductory letter.

Results

The health plans identified 12,000 eligible enrollees (8551 in Health Plan Washington and 3449 in Health Plan Oregon). Health Plan Washington mailed an introductory letter and FIT kit to 8551 enrollees (100%) and delivered a reminder call to 839 (10.3% of the 8132 attempted). Health Plan Oregon mailed an introductory letter, and a letter and FIT kit plus a reminder postcard to 2812 enrollees (81.5%) and 2650 enrollees (76.8%), respectively. FIT completion rates were 18.2% (1557 of 8551 enrollees) in Health Plan Washington. In Health Plan Oregon, completion rates were 17.4% (488 of 2812 enrollees) among enrollees who were mailed an introductory letter and 18.3% (484 of 2650 enrollees) among enrollees who also were mailed a FIT kit plus reminder postcard.

Conclusions

The implementation of mailed FIT outreach by health plans may be effective and could reach many individuals at risk of developing colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer screening uptake is low, particularly among individuals enrolled in Medicaid. The implementation of mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach among health plans may be effective and could reach many individuals at risk of developing colorectal cancer.

Key Collaborative Factors When Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations Work With Primary Care Clinics to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening: Relationships, Data, and Quality Improvement Infrastructure

Purpose

Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are implementing interventions to achieve triple-aim objectives of improved quality and experience of care while maintaining costs. Partnering across organizational boundaries is perceived as critical to ACO success.

Methods

We conducted a comparative case study of 14 Medicaid ACOs in Oregon and their contracted primary care clinics using public performance data, key informant interviews, and consultation field notes. We focused on how ACOs work with clinics to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening — one incentivized performance metric.

Results

ACOs implemented a broad spectrum of multi-component interventions designed to increase CRC screening. The most common interventions focused on reducing structural barriers (n = 12 ACOs), delivering provider assessment and feedback (n = 11), and providing patient reminders (n = 7). ACOs developed their processes and infrastructure for working with clinics over time. Facilitators of successful collaboration included a history of and commitment to collaboration (partnership); the ability to provide accurate data to prioritize action and monitor improvement (performance data), and supporting clinics’ reflective learning through facilitation, learning collaboratives; and support of ACO as well as clinic-based staffing (quality improvement infrastructure). Two unintended consequences of ACO–clinic partnership emerged: potential exclusion of smaller clinics and metric focus and fatigue.

Conclusion

Our findings identified partnership, performance data, and quality improvement infrastructure as critical dimensions when Medicaid ACOs work with primary care to improve CRC screening. Findings may extend to other metric targets.

Challenges in assessing population reach in a pragmatic trial

Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial conducted at federally qualified health centers and designed to “Reach” as many unscreened patients as possible by directly mailing them fecal screening tests.

STOP CRC used an electronic health record registry to identify individuals' needing CRC screening and mail interventions to them. The registry was updated daily removing individuals completing CRC screening or those who no longer were clinic patients. Reach, a component RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance), is defined as the absolute number, percent, and representativeness of individuals “willing to participate in” or “exposed to” an initiative. We describe the complexities of measuring Reach in a pragmatic trial.

Overall 21,134 patients were on the registry list for at least one day, with 18,226 remaining after removing patients completing screening before any mailings. Observed Reached (the percent of individuals exposed to the intervention) using each denominator was 30.7% and 35.6% respectively. Reach improved only modestly after accounting for factors that made it impossible for clinics to send mailings. Few differences were observed in demographic and health care utilization factors among individuals Reached versus not Reached, suggesting that health center Implementation was more influential than patients' willingness or ability to participate.

A pragmatic definition of Reach that accounted for dynamic changes the absolute number eligible and the proportion exposed was more useful than traditional definitions of Reach. Actual Reach was dependent on Implementation and not patient level characteristics.

Clinical Trials Registration Number: ClincalTrials.gov (NCT01742065).

Factors Affecting Adherence in a Pragmatic Trial of Annual Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical test (FIT) reduces the burden of colorectal cancer. However, effectiveness relies on annual adherence, which presents challenges for clinic staff and patients.

OBJECTIVE

Describe FIT return rates and identify factors associated with FIT adherence over 2 years in a mailed FIT outreach program in federally qualified health centers.

DESIGN

Observational study nested in the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) trial. Five thousand one hundred ninety-five patients had an initial FIT order and were followed for ≥ 2 years (3574 also had a FIT order in the second year).

MAIN MEASURES

FIT return percent in each year and patient- and neighborhood-level characteristics associated with FIT adherence.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, the proportion of FIT orders that were completed was 46% in the patients' first year and 41% in the patients' second year. Of the 5195 patients with a FIT order in year 1, 3574 (69%) also had a FIT order in year 2 (71% of year 1 adherers and 67% of year 1 non-adherers, p = 0.009). Among those with a FIT order in the second year, the FIT return rate was about twice as high among those who were adherent in the first year (952/1674, or 57%) as among those who were not (531/1900, or 28%, p < 0.0001). Patient-level characteristics associated with higher odds of FIT return were a history of FIT screening at baseline, age over 65 (vs 50-65), no current tobacco use, recent receipt of a mammogram or flu vaccine, Asian ancestry (compared to non-Hispanic white), and non-English preference. The only neighborhood factor associated with lower FIT return rate was patient's larger residential city size.

CONCLUSION

Our findings can inform the customization of programs to promote FIT return among patients who receive care at federally qualified health centers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Using a continuum of hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies to put research-tested colorectal screening interventions into practice

Background

Few previous studies have applied the hybrid effectiveness-implementation design framework to illustrate the way in which an intervention was progressively implemented and evaluated across multiple studies in diverse settings.

Methods

We describe the design components and methodologies of three studies that sought to improve rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using mailed outreach, and apply domains put forth by Curran et al.: research aims, research questions, comparison conditions, sample, evaluation methods, measures, and potential challenges.

The Hybrid 1 study (emphasis on effectiveness) was a patient-level randomized trial of a mailed fecal test and stepped phone-outreach intervention program delivered in an integrated healthcare system (21 clinics, 4673 patients). The primary outcome was effectiveness (CRC screening uptake). Implementation outcomes included cost-effectiveness and acceptability.

The Hybrid 2 study (shared emphasis on effectiveness and implementation) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial of mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach implemented at safety net clinics (26 clinics, 41,000 patients). The intervention used electronic health record tools (adapted from Hybrid 1) and clinic personnel to deliver the intervention. Outcomes included effectiveness (FIT completion) and implementation (FIT kits delivered, clinic barriers and facilitators, cost-effectiveness).

Hybrid 3 study (emphasis on implementation) is a demonstration project being conducted by two Medicaid/Medicare insurance plans (2 states, 12,000 patients) comparing two strategies for implementing mailed FIT programs that addressed Hybrid 2 implementation barriers. Outcomes include implementation (activities delivered, barriers) and effectiveness (FIT completion).

Results

The effectiveness-implementation typology successfully identified a number of distinguishing features between the three studies. Two additional features, program design and program delivery, varied across our studies, and we propose adding them to the current typology. Program design and program delivery reflect the process by which and by whom a program is designed and delivered (e.g., research staff vs. clinic/health plan staff).

Conclusions

We describe three studies that demonstrate the hybrid effectiveness to implementation continuum and make recommendations for expanding the hybrid typology to include new descriptive features. Additional comparisons of Hybrid 1, 2, and 3 studies may help confirm whether our hybrid typology refinements are generalizable markers of the pipeline from research to practice.

Colorectal cancer screening in newly insured Medicaid members: a review of concurrent federal and state policies

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized by Medicaid enrollees and the uninsured. Multiple national and state policies were enacted from 2010 to 2014 to increase access to Medicaid and to promote CRC screening among Medicaid enrollees. We aimed to determine the impact of these policies on screening initiation among newly enrolled Oregon Medicaid beneficiaries age-eligible for CRC screening.

METHODS

We identified national and state policies affecting Medicaid coverage and preventive services in Oregon during 2010-2014. We used Oregon Medicaid claims data from 2010 to 2015 to conduct a cohort analysis of enrollees who turned 50 and became age-eligible for CRC screening (a prevention milestone, and an age at which guideline-concordant screening can be assessed within a single year) during each year from 2010 to 2014. We calculated risk ratios to assess whether first year of Medicaid enrollment and/or year turned 50 was associated with CRC screening initiation.

RESULTS

We identified 14,576 Oregon Medicaid enrollees who turned 50 during 2010-2014; 2429 (17%) completed CRC screening within 12 months after turning 50. Individuals newly enrolled in Medicaid in 2013 or 2014 were 1.58 and 1.31 times more likely, respectively, to initiate CRC screening than those enrolled by 2010. A primary care visit in the calendar year, having one or more chronic conditions, and being Hispanic was also associated with CRC screening initiation.

DISCUSSION

The increased uptake of CRC screening in 2013 and 2014 is associated with the timing of policies such as Medicaid expansion, enhanced federal matching for preventive services offered to Medicaid enrollees without cost sharing, and formation of Medicaid accountable care organizations, which included CRC screening as an incentivized quality metric.

Application of improved approach to evaluate a community intervention to reduce exposure of young children living in farmworker households to organophosphate pesticides

The take-home pathway is a significant source of organophosphate pesticide exposure for young children (3-5 years old) living with an adult farmworker. This avoidable exposure pathway is an important target for intervention. We selected 24 agricultural communities in the Yakima Valley of Washington State and randomly assigned them to receive an educational intervention (n = 12) to reduce children's pesticide exposure or usual care (n = 12). We assessed exposure to pesticides in nearly 200 adults and children during the pre and post-intervention periods by measuring metabolites in urine. We compared pre- and post-intervention exposures by expressing the child's pesticide metabolite concentration as a fraction of the adult's concentration living in the same household, because the amount of pesticides applied during the collection periods varied. Exposures in our community were consistently higher, sometimes above the 95^th percentile of the exposures reported by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). While intervention and control communities demonstrated a reduction in the ratio of child to adult exposure, this reduction was more pronounced in intervention communities (2.7-fold, p < 0.001 compared to 1.7-fold, p = 0.052 for intervention and control, respectively). By examining the child/adult biomarker ratio, we demonstrated that our community-based intervention was effective in reducing pesticide exposure to children in agricultural communities.

Pragmatic clinical trials offer unique opportunities for disseminating, implementing, and sustaining evidence-based practices into clinical care: Proceedings of a workshop

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Health Care Systems (HCS) Research Collaboratory hosted a workshop to explore challenges and strategies for the dissemination, implementation, and sustainability of findings from pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) embedded in HCS. PCTs are designed to assess the impact of interventions delivered in usual or real-world conditions and leverage existing infrastructure to answer important clinical questions. The goal of the workshop was to discuss strategies for conducting impactful future PCTs that bridge the gap between evidence, practice, and policy. This paper summarizes presentations about how to design and conduct PCTs embedded in HCS and use dissemination and implementation strategies during the planning and conduct of projects, emphasizing the ever-changing world of care delivery and the need for pragmatic trial operations to adapt at various levels of operation.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics

STOP CRC is a cluster-randomized pragmatic study of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program within eight federally-qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Oregon and California promoting fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) with appropriate colonoscopy follow-up. Results are presented of a cost-effectiveness analysis of STOP CRC. Organization staff completed activity-based costing spreadsheets, assigning labor hours by intervention activity and job-specific wage rates. Non-labor costs were from study data. Data were collected over February 2014-February 2016; analyses were performed in 2016-2017. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using completed FITs adjusted for number of screening-eligible patients (SEPs), as the effectiveness measure were calculated overall and by organization. Intervention delivery costs totaled $305 K across eight organizations (range: $10.2 K-$110 K). Overall delivery cost per SEP was $14.43 (range: $10.37-$19.10). The largest cost category across organizations was implementation, specifically mailing preparation. The overall ICER was $483 per SEP-adjusted completed FIT (range: $96-$1021 among organizations with positive effectiveness). Lagged data accounting for implementation delay produced comparable results. The costs of colonoscopies following abnormal FITs decreased the overall ICER to S409 because usual care clinics generated more such colonoscopies than intervention clinics. Using lagged data, follow-up colonoscopies increase the ICER by 4.3% to $460. Results indicate the complex implications for cost-effectiveness of implementing standard CRC screening within a pragmatic setting involving FQHCs with varied patient populations, clinical structures, and resources. Performance variation across organizations emphasizes the need for future evaluations that inform the introduction of efficient CRC screening to underserved populations.

Does a transition to accountable care in Medicaid shift the modality of colorectal cancer testing?

BACKGROUND

Health care reform is changing preventive services delivery. This study explored trajectories in colorectal cancer (CRC) testing over a 5-year period that included implementation of 16 Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs, 2012) and Medicaid expansion (2014) - two provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) - within the state of Oregon, USA.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of Oregon's Medicaid claims for enrollee's eligible for CRC screening (50-64 years) spanning January 2010 through December 2014. Our analysis was conducted and refined April 2016 through June 2018. The analysis assessed the annual probability of patients receiving CRC testing and the modality used (e.g., colonoscopy, fecal testing) relative to a baseline year (2010). We hypothesized that CRC testing would increase following Medicaid ACO formation - called Coordinated Care Organizations (CCOs).

RESULTS

A total of 132,424 unique Medicaid enrollees (representing 255,192 person-years) met inclusion criteria over the 5-year study. Controlling for demographic and regional factors, the predicted probability of CRC testing was significantly higher in 2014 (+ 1.4 percentage points, p < 0.001) compared to the 2010 baseline but not in 2012 or 2013. Increased fecal testing using Fecal Occult Blood Tests (FOBT) or Fecal Immunochemical Tests (FIT) played a prominent role in 2014. The uptick in statewide fecal testing appears driven primarily by a subset of CCOs.

CONCLUSIONS

Observed CRC testing did not immediately increase following the transition to CCOs in 2012. However increased testing in 2014, may reflect a delay in implementation of interventions to increase CRC screening and/or a strong desire by newly insured Medicaid CCO members to receive preventive care.

Understanding Complex Roles of Family for Latina Health: Evaluating Family Obligation Stress

We developed a measure of family obligation stress and compared its relationship to health and unmet health care needs relative to social support among a sample of US-based Latinas. Data come from a randomized controlled trial within 4 clinics to increase mammography among Latinas (n = 539). The 1-factor measure had acceptable reliability and construct validity. Family obligation stress was associated with worse health and greater unmet health care needs. Family obligation stress varied by years in the United States and country of origin. Our measure of family obligation stress contributes new venues to family research among Latino populations.

Effectiveness of automated and live phone reminders after mailed-FIT outreach in a pilot randomized trial

The effectiveness of annual mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) outreach is highest when return rates are optimized, which is aided by patient reminders. In a pilot patient-randomized controlled trial in two western Washington clinics of the Sea Mar Community Health Centers, we compared the effectiveness of two phone-based approaches to mailed FIT outreach reminders. In fall 2016, patients ages 50–75, due for colorectal cancer screening, and with a visit in the previous year at either of two clinics, were mailed an introductory letter and FIT. Those who did not return the FIT within 3 weeks (N = 427) were randomized to receive either: a) a series of up to 6 automated phone reminders; or b) the combination of automated and live phone reminders (up to 6 in total). The sole outcome was FIT return within 6 months after the FIT mailing. FIT completion rates were similar in the groups assigned to receive automated calls vs automated plus live calls (40% vs 39%; p = 0.89). The effectiveness of FIT reminder mode differed by language preference (p for interaction = 0.03): among Spanish-preferring patients (n = 106), FIT return rates were higher in the automated-only group than to the auto- plus live-call group (62% vs 39%, p = 0.02). Among English-preferring patients, no difference in modes was observed (n = 279, 32% vs 34%, p = 0.74). We observed no added benefit of live reminder calls in a mailed FIT plus automated call reminder program; our findings may inform efforts to efficiently optimize mailed-FIT outreach programs.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01742065

Effectiveness of a Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Program in Community Health Clinics: The STOP CRC Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Approximately 24 million US individuals receive care at federally qualified health centers, which historically have low rates of colorectal cancer screening. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine colorectal cancer screening for individuals aged 50 to 75 years.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach program implemented in health centers as part of standard care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cluster randomized pragmatic clinical trial was conducted in 26 federally qualified health center clinics, representing 8 health centers in Oregon and California, randomized to intervention (n = 13) or usual care (n = 13). All participants were overdue for colorectal cancer screening during the accrual interval (February 4, 2014 to February 3, 2015).

INTERVENTIONS

Electronic health record-embedded tools to identify eligible adults and to facilitate implementation of a stepwise mailed intervention involving (1) an introductory letter, (2) a mailed FIT, and (3) a reminder letter; training, collaborative learning, and facilitation through a practice improvement process.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Effectiveness was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who completed a FIT, and secondarily, any colorectal cancer screening within 12 months of accrual or by August 3, 2015. Implementation was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who were mailed an introductory letter and ordered a FIT.

RESULTS

Twenty-six clinics with 41 193 adults (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [6.3] years; 22 994 women) were randomized to receive the direct mail colorectal screening intervention (13 clinics; 21 134 patients) or usual care (13 clinics; 20 059 patients). Compared with usual care clinics, intervention clinics had significantly higher adjusted clinic-level proportion of participants who completed a FIT (13.9% vs 10.4%; difference, 3.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%) and any colorectal cancer screening (18.3% vs 14.5%; difference, 3.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6%-7.0%). We observed large variation across health centers in effectiveness (FIT completion differences range, -7.4 percentage points to 17.6 percentage points) and implementation (proportion who were mailed a FIT range, 6.5% to 68.2%). The number needed to mail to achieve a completed FIT was 4.8 overall, and 4.0 in clinics that mailed a FIT reminder.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

An EHR-embedded mailed FIT outreach intervention significantly improved rates of FIT completion and rates of any colorectal cancer screening. Higher rates of colorectal cancer screening occurred in clinics that successfully implemented the mailed outreach program.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01742065.

Positive predictive values of fecal immunochemical tests used in the STOP CRC pragmatic trial

Annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is cost-effective for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, FIT positivity rates and positive predictive value (PPV) can vary substantially, with false-positive (FP) results adding to colonoscopy burden without improving cancer detection. Our objective was to describe FIT PPV and the factors associated with FP results among patients undergoing CRC screening. In an ongoing pragmatic clinical trial of mailed-FIT outreach, clinics delivered one of three FIT brands (InSure, OC-Micro, and Hemosure). Patients who had a positive FIT result and a follow-up colonoscopy were included in this analysis (N = 1130). Patients' demographic and medical histories were abstracted from electronic health records (EHR). Associations with a FP result (ie, a positive FIT result with no evidence of advanced neoplasia during follow-up colonoscopy) were evaluated for FIT brand and patient factors using mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression. The mean proportion of FIT-positive results ranged from 8% in centers using the OC-Micro test to 21% for Hemosure. PPVs for advanced neoplasia were 0.30 to 0.17, respectively (P for χ2  = 0.08). In multivariable-adjusted models, use of Hemosure was associated with greater odds of a FP result than OC-Micro (OR = 2.00, 95% CI: 0.47-8.56) or InSure (OR = 1.72, 95% CI: 0.44-6.68). However, only female sex (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.19-2.10) and history of a colorectal condition (OR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.13-4.15) were significantly associated with FP. In conclusion, FIT positivity varied by brand, and FP results differed by patient factors available through the EHR. These results can be used to minimize the frequency of FP results, reducing patient distress and colonoscopy burden.

Abstract IA15: Neighborhood factors and changes in mammography screening rates in response to promotora intervention in Latinas

Latinas have relatively low rates of mammography screening participation, which may contribute to later stage of breast cancer at diagnosis for Latinas, and also higher mortality rates following cancer diagnosis. We conducted a multilevel intervention study (¡Fortaleza Latina!) to increase breast cancer screening among Latinas in Western Washington who seek care at a safety net health center. We were also interested in discovering if and how neighborhood factors may be associated with Latinas' barriers to or uptake of cancer screening, including mammography. We examined neighborhood racial/ethnic composition and socioeconomic status in relation to these factors.

The study enrolled 536 Latinas ages 42 to 74 who had a primary care clinic visit in the previous 5 years and had not obtained a mammogram in the previous 2 years. Participants were block randomized within clinic to either (i) a control arm (usual care) or (ii) a promotora-led, motivational interviewing intervention that included a home visit and telephone follow-up. At the clinic level, two of four participating clinics were provided additional mammography services delivered by a mobile mammography unit. Barriers to obtaining mammography were categorized into knowledge, psychocultural, and economic. American Community Survey (2007-2011) data were used to calculate four neighborhood measures: socioeconomic-based concentration, socioeconomic-based segregation, Latino-based concentration, and Latino-based segregation.

Rates of screening mammography one year post-randomization were 19.6% in the intervention group and 11.0% in the usual care group (P &lt; 0.01), based on medical record data. No significant differences in participants' mammography screening were observed in clinics assigned to additional mammography services versus usual care (15.8% vs. 14.4%; P = 0.68). Thirty-five percent and 31% of women attributed failure to complete mammography screening to knowledge-based or economic reasons, respectively. These attribution percentages varied significantly by Latino-based segregation (P&lt;0.05). In addition, relative to women residing in areas with greater concentration of Latinos, women in areas with the lowest concentrations were less likely to report knowledge-based reasons for not obtaining a mammogram (p ≤ 0.05).

In conclusion, the multilevel intervention of promotora-delivered motivational interviewing and free mammography services modestly raised rates of participation in breast cancer screening among Latinas. Future research might examine the mediating role of neighborhood characteristics in the efficacy of mammography screening interventions.

Citation Format: Shirley A.A. Beresford, Yamile Molina, Jesse J. Plascak, Donald L. Patrick, Gloria D. Coronado. Neighborhood factors and changes in mammography screening rates in response to promotora intervention in Latinas [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Tenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2017 Sep 25-28; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018;27(7 Suppl):Abstract nr IA15.

Participatory Research to Advance Colon Cancer Prevention (PROMPT): Study protocol for a pragmatic trial

BACKGROUND

Colon cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. The Participatory Research to Advance Colon Cancer Prevention (PROMPT) study is a collaboration between two research institutions and a federally qualified health center (FQHC). The study seeks to raise colon cancer screening rates using a direct-mail fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and reminder program in an FQHC serving a predominantly Latino population in California.

METHODS

PROMPT is a pragmatic trial enrolling 16 clinics. The study will test automated and live prompts (i.e., alerts, reminders) to a direct-mail FIT program in two phases. In Phase I, we tailored and defined intervention components for the pilot using a community-based participatory research approach called boot camp translation. We then plan to conduct a three-arm patient-randomized comparative effectiveness trial in two pilot clinics to compare 1) automated prompts, 2) live prompts, and 3) a combination of automated plus live prompts to alert and remind patients to complete screening. In Phase II, the adapted best practice intervention will be spread to additional clinics within the FQHC (estimated population 27,000) and assessed for effectiveness. Patient and staff interviews will be conducted to explore receptivity to the program and identify barriers to implementation.

DISCUSSION

This pragmatic trial applies innovative approaches to engage diverse stakeholders and will test the effectiveness and spread of a direct-mail plus reminder program. If successful, the program will provide a model for a cost-effective method to raise colon cancer screening rates among Latino patients receiving care in FQHCs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Clinical Trial (NCT) Identifier NCT03167125.

Implementation successes and challenges in participating in a pragmatic study to improve colon cancer screening: perspectives of health center leaders

Little is known about the challenges faced by community clinics who must address clinical priorities first when participating in pragmatic studies. We report on implementation challenges faced by the eight community health centers that participated in Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC), a large comparative effectiveness cluster-randomized trial to evaluate a direct-mail program to increase the rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We conducted interviews, at the onset of implementation and 1 year later, with center leaders to identify challenges with implementing and sustaining an electronic medical record (EMR)-driven mailed program to increase CRC screening rates. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to thematically analyze the content of meeting discussions and identify anticipated and experienced challenges. Common early concerns were patients' access to colonoscopy, patients' low awareness of CRC screening, time burden on clinic staff to carry out the STOP CRC program, inability to accurately identify eligible patients, and incompatibility of the program's approach with the patient population or organizational culture. Once the program was rolled out, time burden remained a primary concern and new organizational capacity and EMR issues were raised (e.g., EMR staffing resources and turnover in key leadership positions). Cited program successes were improved CRC screening processes and rates, more patients reached, reduced costs, and improved patient awareness, engagement, or satisfaction. These findings may inform any clinic considering mailed fecal testing programs and future pragmatic research efforts in community health centers.

Timeliness of Colonoscopy After Abnormal Fecal Test Results in a Safety Net Practice

Fecal testing can only reduce colorectal cancer mortality if patients with an abnormal test result receive a follow-up colonoscopy. As part of the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) project, we examined factors associated with adherence to follow-up colonoscopy among patients with abnormal fecal test results. As part of STOP CRC outreach, Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center staff distributed 1753 fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), of which 677 (39 %) were completed, and 56 had an abnormal result (8 %). Project staff used logistic regression analyses to examine factors associated with colonoscopy referral and completion. Of the 56 patients with abnormal FIT results; 45 (80 %) had evidence of a referral for colonoscopy, 32 (57 %) had evidence of a completed colonoscopy within 18 months, and 14 (25 %) within 60 days of an abnormal fecal test result. In adjusted analysis, Hispanics had lower odds of completing follow-up colonoscopy within 60 days than non-Hispanic whites (adjusted OR 0.20; 95 % CI 0.04, 0.92). Colonoscopy within 60 days trended lower for women than for men (adjusted OR 0.25; 95 % CI 0.06-1.04). Among the 24 patients lacking medical record evidence of a colonoscopy, 19 (79 %) had a documented reason, including clinician did not pursue, patient refused, and colonoscopy not indicated. No reason was found for 21 %. Improvements are needed to increase rates of follow-up colonoscopy completion, especially among female and Hispanic patients.

A systematic review of clinic and community intervention to increase fecal testing for colorectal cancer in rural and low-income populations in the United States - How, what and when?

BACKGROUND

Interventions to improve fecal testing for colorectal cancer (CRC) exist, but are not yet routine practice. We conducted this systematic review to determine how implementation strategies and contextual factors influenced the uptake of interventions to increase Fecal Immunochemical Tests (FIT) and Fecal Occult Blood Testing (FOBT) for CRC in rural and low-income populations in the United States.

METHODS

We searched Medline and the Cochrane Library from January 1998 through July 2016, and Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov through March 2015, for original articles of interventions to increase fecal testing for CRC. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. A qualitative synthesis described the relationship between changes in fecal testing rates for CRC, intervention components, implementation strategies, and contextual factors. A technical expert panel of primary care professionals, health system leaders, and academicians guided this work.

RESULTS

Of 4218 citations initially identified, 27 unique studies reported in 29 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 20, 74.1%), community (n = 5, 18.5%), or both (n = 2, 7.4%) settings. All studies (n = 27, 100.0%) described multicomponent interventions. In clinic based studies, components that occurred most frequently among the highly effective/effective study arms were provision of kits by direct mail, use of a pre-addressed stamped envelope, client reminders, and provider ordered in-clinic distribution. Interventions were delivered by clinic staff/community members (n = 10, 37.0%), research staff (n = 6, 22.2%), both (n = 10, 37.0%), or it was unclear (n = 1, 3.7%). Over half of the studies lacked information on training or monitoring intervention fidelity (n = 15, 55.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Studies to improve FIT/FOBT in rural and low-income populations utilized multicomponent interventions. The provision of kits through the mail, use of pre-addressed stamped envelopes, client reminders and in-clinic distribution appeared most frequently in the highly effective/effective clinic-based study arms. Few studies described contextual factors or implementation strategies. More robust application of guidelines to support reporting on methods to select, adapt and implement interventions can help end users determine not just which interventions work to improve CRC screening, but which interventions would work best in their setting given specific patient populations, clinical settings, and community characteristics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, our systematic review protocol was registered with PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews, on April 16, 2015 (registration number CRD42015019557 ).

Estimating the costs and cost-effectiveness of promoting mammography screening among US-based Latinas

PURPOSE

We characterize the costs and cost-effectiveness of a community health worker (CHW)-based intervention to promote screening mammography among US-based non-adherent Latinas.

METHODS

The parent study was a randomized controlled trial for 536 Latinas aged 42-74 years old who had sought care within a safety net health center in Western Washington. Participants were block-randomized within clinic to the control arm (usual care) or intervention arm (CHW-led motivational interviewing intervention). We used the perspective of the organization implementing promotional activities to characterize costs and cost-effectiveness. Cost data were categorized as program set-up and maintenance (initial training, booster/annual training) program implementation (administrative activities, intervention delivery); and, overhead/miscellaneous expenses. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost of screening for each additional woman screened between the intervention and control arms.

RESULTS

The respective costs per participant for standard care and the intervention arm were $69.96 and $300.99. There were no study arm differences in 1-year QALYs were small among women who completed a 12-month follow-up survey (intervention= 0.8827, standard care = 0.8841). Most costs pertained to program implementation and administrative activities specifically. The incremental cost per additional woman screened was $2,595.32.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings are within the ranges of costs and cost-effectiveness for other CHW programs to promote screening mammography among underserved populations. Our strong study design and focus on non-adherent women provides important strengths to this body of work, especially give implementation and dissemination science efforts regarding CHW-based health promotion for health disparity populations.

Mobile Versus Fixed Facility: Latinas' Attitudes and Preferences for Obtaining a Mammogram

PURPOSE

Mobile mammographic services have been proposed as a way to reduce Latinas' disproportionate late-stage presentation compared with white women by increasing their access to mammography. The aims of this study were to assess why Latinas may not use mobile mammographic services and to explore their preferences after using these services.

METHODS

Using a mixed-methods approach, a secondary analysis was conducted of baseline survey data (n = 538) from a randomized controlled trial to improve screening mammography rates among Latinas in Washington. Descriptive statistics and bivariate regression were used to characterize mammography location preferences and to test for associations with sociodemographic indices, health care access, and perceived breast cancer risk and beliefs. On the basis of these findings, a qualitative study (n = 18) was used to explore changes in perceptions after using mobile mammographic services.

RESULTS

More Latinas preferred obtaining a mammogram at a fixed facility (52.3% [n = 276]) compared with having no preference (46.3% [n = 249]) and preferring mobile mammographic services (1.7% [n = 9]). Concerns about privacy and comfort (15.6% [n = 84]) and about general quality (10.6% [n = 57]) were common reasons for preferring a fixed facility. Those with no history of mammography preferred a fixed facility (P < .05). In the qualitative study, Latinas expressed similar initial concerns but became positive toward the mobile mammographic services after obtaining a mammogram.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most Latinas preferred obtaining a mammogram at a fixed facility, positive experiences with mobile mammography services changed their attitudes toward them. These findings highlight the need to include community education when using mobile mammographic service to increase screening mammography rates in underserved communities.

Pragmatic clinical trials embedded in healthcare systems: generalizable lessons from the NIH Collaboratory

BACKGROUND

The clinical research enterprise is not producing the evidence decision makers arguably need in a timely and cost effective manner; research currently involves the use of labor-intensive parallel systems that are separate from clinical care. The emergence of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) poses a possible solution: these large-scale trials are embedded within routine clinical care and often involve cluster randomization of hospitals, clinics, primary care providers, etc. Interventions can be implemented by health system personnel through usual communication channels and quality improvement infrastructure, and data collected as part of routine clinical care. However, experience with these trials is nascent and best practices regarding design operational, analytic, and reporting methodologies are undeveloped.

METHODS

To strengthen the national capacity to implement cost-effective, large-scale PCTs, the Common Fund of the National Institutes of Health created the Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (Collaboratory) to support the design, execution, and dissemination of a series of demonstration projects using a pragmatic research design.

RESULTS

In this article, we will describe the Collaboratory, highlight some of the challenges encountered and solutions developed thus far, and discuss remaining barriers and opportunities for large-scale evidence generation using PCTs.

CONCLUSION

A planning phase is critical, and even with careful planning, new challenges arise during execution; comparisons between arms can be complicated by unanticipated changes. Early and ongoing engagement with both health care system leaders and front-line clinicians is critical for success. There is also marked uncertainty when applying existing ethical and regulatory frameworks to PCTS, and using existing electronic health records for data capture adds complexity.

Engaging Study Participants in Research Dissemination at a Center for Population Health and Health Disparities

BACKGROUND

Research dissemination is a priority for The Partnership for Understanding and Eliminating Disparate Outcomes (PUEDO) for Latinas, a Center for Population Health and Health Disparities located at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify types of PUEDO research findings our participants wanted and why, dissemination audiences beyond PUEDO participants, and strategies to communicate diverse findings about breast cancer and breast cancer disparities.

METHODS

Five focus groups with PUEDO study participants (N = 25) were transcribed for qualitative content analysis (average participants per focus group, 5; range, 2-11).

RESULTS

Participants reported wanting to learn aggregate and personal results and were influenced by their life experiences, their experiences as study participants, and the relevance they believed specific results would have for their lives. Women advocated for broad dissemination and inclusive communication using a simple paper-based strategy that would be accessible to diverse audiences (e.g., study participants, policymakers, recent immigrants).

CONCLUSIONS

Focus groups informed PUEDO's dissemination strategy, which concentrates on study participants and the regional Latino community. This approach to dissemination should maximize information uptake and community benefit.

Geographic and population-level disparities in colorectal cancer testing: A multilevel analysis of Medicaid and commercial claims data

Morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be attenuated through guideline concordant screening and intervention. This study used Medicaid and commercial claims data to examine individual and geographic factors associated with CRC testing rates in one state (Oregon). A total of 64,711 beneficiaries (4516 Medicaid; 60,195 Commercial) became newly age-eligible for CRC screening and met inclusion criteria (e.g., continuously enrolled, no prior history) during the study period (January 2010-December 2013). We estimated multilevel models to examine predictors for CRC testing, including individual (e.g., gender, insurance, rurality, access to care, distance to endoscopy facility) and geographic factors at the county level (e.g., poverty, uninsurance). Despite insurance coverage, only two out of five (42%) beneficiaries had evidence of CRC testing during the four year study window. CRC testing varied from 22.4% to 46.8% across Oregon's 36 counties; counties with higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation had lower levels of testing. After controlling for age, beneficiaries had greater odds of receiving CRC testing if they were female (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08), commercially insured, or urban residents (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.21). Accessing primary care (OR 2.47, 95% CI 2.37-2.57), but not distance to endoscopy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92-1.03) was associated with testing. CRC testing in newly age-eligible Medicaid and commercial members remains markedly low. Disparities exist by gender, geographic residence, insurance coverage, and access to primary care. Work remains to increase CRC testing to acceptable levels, and to select and implement interventions targeting the counties and populations in greatest need.

Seasonal and occupational trends of five organophosphate pesticides in house dust

Since 1998, the University of Washington's Center for Child Environmental Health Risks Research has followed a community-based participatory research strategy in the Lower Yakima Valley of Washington State to assess pesticide exposure among families of Hispanic farmworkers. As a part of this longitudinal study, house dust samples were collected from both farmworker and non-farmworker households, across three agricultural seasons (thinning, harvest and non-spray). The household dust samples were analyzed for five organophosphate pesticides: azinphos-methyl, phosmet, malathion, diazinon, and chlorpyrifos. Organophosphate pesticide levels in house dust were generally reflective of annual use rates and varied by occupational status and agricultural season. Overall, organophosphate pesticide concentrations were higher in the thinning and harvest seasons than in the non-spray season. Azinphos-methyl was found in the highest concentrations across all seasons and occupations. Farmworker house dust had between 5- and 9-fold higher concentrations of azinphos-methyl than non-farmworker house dust. Phosmet was found in 5-7-fold higher concentrations in farmworker house dust relative to non-farmworker house dust. Malathion and chlorpyriphos concentrations in farmworker house dust ranged between 1.8- and 9.8-fold higher than non-farmworker house dust. Diazinon showed a defined seasonal pattern that peaked in the harvest season and did not significantly differ between farmworker and non-farmworker house dust. The observed occupational differences in four out of five of the pesticide residues measured provides evidence supporting an occupational take home pathway, in which workers may bring pesticides home on their skin or clothing. Further, these results demonstrate the ability of dust samples to inform the episodic nature of organophosphate pesticide exposures and the need to collect multiple samples for complete characterization of exposure potential.

Applying the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach to a large pragmatic study involving safety net clinics

Background

The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle is a commonly used improvement process in health care settings, although its documented use in pragmatic clinical research is rare. A recent pragmatic clinical research study, called the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC), used this process to optimize the research implementation of an automated colon cancer screening outreach program in intervention clinics. We describe the process of using this PDSA approach, the selection of PDSA topics by clinic leaders, and project leaders’ reactions to using PDSA in pragmatic research.

Methods

STOP CRC is a cluster-randomized pragmatic study that aims to test the effectiveness of a direct-mail fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) program involving eight Federally Qualified Health Centers in Oregon and California. We and a practice improvement specialist trained in the PDSA process delivered structured presentations to leaders of these centers; the presentations addressed how to apply the PDSA process to improve implementation of a mailed outreach program offering colorectal cancer screening through FIT tests. Center leaders submitted PDSA plans and delivered reports via webinar at quarterly meetings of the project’s advisory board. Project staff conducted one-on-one, 45-min interviews with project leads from each health center to assess the reaction to and value of the PDSA process in supporting the implementation of STOP CRC.

Results

Clinic-selected PDSA activities included refining the intervention staffing model, improving outreach materials, and changing workflow steps. Common benefits of using PDSA cycles in pragmatic research were that it provided a structure for staff to focus on improving the program and it allowed staff to test the change they wanted to see. A commonly reported challenge was measuring the success of the PDSA process with the available electronic medical record tools.

Conclusion

Understanding how the PDSA process can be applied to pragmatic trials and the reaction of clinic staff to their use may help clinics integrate evidence-based interventions into their everyday care processes.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01742065. Registered October 31, 2013.

Multilevel Intervention Raises Latina Participation in Mammography Screening: Findings from ¡Fortaleza Latina!

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women in the United States, and Latinas have relatively low rates of screening participation. The Multilevel Intervention to Increase Latina Participation in Mammography Screening study (¡Fortaleza Latina!) sought to assess the efficacy of a clinic- and patient-level program to increase breast cancer screening among Latinas in Western Washington who seek care at a safety net health center.

METHODS

The study enrolled 536 Latinas ages 42 to 74 who had a primary care clinic visit in the previous 5 years and had not obtained a mammogram in the previous 2 years. Participants were block-randomized within clinic to either (i) a control arm (usual care) or (ii) a promotora-led, motivational interviewing intervention that included a home visit and telephone follow-up. At the clinic level, two of four participating clinics were provided additional mammography services delivered by a mobile mammography unit.

RESULTS

Rates of screening mammography 1 year post-randomization were 19.6% in the intervention group and 11.0% in the usual care group (P < 0.01), based on medical record data. No significant differences in participants' mammography screening were observed in clinics randomized to additional mammography services versus usual care (15.8% vs. 14.4%; P = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

This multilevel intervention of promotora-delivered motivational interviewing and free mammography services modestly raised rates of participation in breast cancer screening among Latinas.

IMPACT

Our findings can inform future efforts to boost mammography participation in safety net practices. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(4); 584-92. ©2016 AACR SEE ALL ARTICLES IN THIS CEBP FOCUS SECTION, "MULTILEVEL APPROACHES TO ADDRESSING CANCER HEALTH DISPARITIES".

The validation of electronic health records in accurately identifying patients eligible for colorectal cancer screening in safety net clinics

BACKGROUND

While electronic health records (EHRs) play a key role in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by identifying individuals who are overdue, important shortfalls remain.

OBJECTIVES

As part of the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer (STOP CRC) study, we assessed the accuracy of EHR codes in identifying patients eligible for CRC screening.

METHODS

We selected a stratified random sample of 800 study participants from 26 participating clinics, in the Pacific Northwest region of the USA. We compared data obtained through codes in the EHR to conduct a manual chart audit. A trained chart abstractor completed the abstraction of eligible and ineligible patients.

RESULTS

Of 520 individuals in need of CRC screening, identified via the EHR, 459 were confirmed through chart review (positive predictive value = 88%). Of 280 individuals flagged as up-to-date in their screening per EHR data, 269 were confirmed through chart review (negative predictive value = 96%). Among the 61 patients incorrectly classified as eligible, 83.6% of disagreements were due to evidence of a prior colonoscopy or referral that was not captured in recognizable fields in the EHR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight importance of better capture of past screening events in the EHR. While the need for better population-based data is not unique to CRC screening, it provides an important example of the use of population-based data not only for tracking care, but also for delivering interventions.

Understanding HPV vaccination among Latino adolescent girls in three U.S. regions

A multi-site study was conducted to assess HPV vaccine initiation and correlates of initiation among Latina adolescents. The study was a collaboration of the CDC/NCI-funded Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network. Data were collected in 2009 from caregivers of Latina adolescents recruited from Los Angeles Country (n = 274), Washington State (Yakima Valley region; n = 90), and Texas (Houston, n = 38; Lower Rio Grande Valley, n = 42). A set of 24 survey items assessed use of the HPV vaccine and awareness, attitudes and barriers to vaccination. Moderate levels of vaccine awareness among caregivers and low uptake of the vaccine (26-37%) among girls were observed. Attitudinal barriers such as concerns about negative effects of the vaccine on daughter's sexual behavior, fertility, and future health were infrequently endorsed. Efforts to understand regional similarities and differences may help inform interventions.

Neighborhood Predictors of Mammography Barriers Among US-Based Latinas

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how neighborhood factors are associated with Latinas' barriers to cancer screening, including mammography. To address this gap, we examined barriers to mammography by neighborhood racial/ethnic composition and socioeconomic status among a federally qualified health center (FQHC)-based sample of non-adherent Latinas in Western Washington State.

METHODS

Baseline data were drawn from a larger intervention study (n = 536 Latinas). Women indicated why they had not obtained a mammogram in the past 2 years (no reason, knowledge, psychocultural, economic). American Community Survey (2007-2011) data were used to calculate four neighborhood measures that were categorized in tertiles (T): socioeconomic-based concentration, socioeconomic-based segregation, Latino-based concentration, and Latino-based segregation.

RESULTS

The proportion of women reporting knowledge-, psychocultural-, and economic-based reasons for not obtaining mammograms in the past 2 years was, respectively, 0.35, 0.19, and 0.31. Approximately 14 % indicated no particular reason. Relative to women residing in areas with greater Latino-based segregation, women in areas with less Latino-based segregation were less likely to report knowledge-based and economic-based reasons for not obtaining a mammogram (p ≤ 0.05). Relative to women residing in areas with greater concentration of Latinos, women in areas with the lowest concentrations were less likely to report knowledge-based reasons for not obtaining a mammogram (p ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide important information about the role of neighborhood characteristics and mammography use among Latinas obtaining care from FQHCs. Future research might examine the mediating role of neighborhood characteristics in the efficacy of mammography screening interventions.

Abstract IA13: Understanding and preventing breast cancer disparities in Latinas

Background: Although Latinas have lower breast cancer rates compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), breast cancer is the top cancer killer of Latinas. There are many reasons for this, some involve biology, types of breast cancer found in Latinas, metabolic increases thought to be due to adoption of western diets, and lack of screening for early detection. In a large breast cancer program examining such cancers in Latinas, we overcame a number of challenges in each of four studies examining the fore-named factors.

Methods: Four projects and four cores made up our Center for Population Health and Health Disparities (CPHHD). Using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) model, we recruited Latinas to participate in studies investigating the various factors related to breast cancer. Projects used robust methodologies to assess the relationship between elevated risks of triple negative breast cancers; the effects of a typical US diet compared to a traditional Mexican diet; the role of genetic ancestry on breast cancer in Latinas; and the effectiveness of a lay health worker intervention to increase breast cancer screening. As part of the program, we asked investigators to identify challenges encountered and how they were resolved.

Results: All four projects were completed on time. Overall results of each project will be presented. Challenges in each project will be described as well as how the challenges were overcome. The role of the Community Advisory Board will be described and how its suggestions for sending results back to participants were adopted and incorporated in the program.

Discussion: Embarking on a large transdisciplinary program to understand Latinas' breast cancer risks and to translate those risks to the population of interest has been stimulating and thought-provoking. Addressing challenges as they emerged and finding solutions required a team effort. By obtaining perspectives from a variety of disciplines, we were able to solve the challenges. This team approach is recommended for similar studies.

Citation Format: Beti Thompson, Shirley AA Beresford, Gloria D. Coronado, Marian Neuhouser, Christopher I. Li, Linda S. Cook, Peggy Porter. Understanding and preventing breast cancer disparities in Latinas. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eighth AACR Conference on The Science of Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; Nov 13-16, 2015; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016;25(3 Suppl):Abstract nr IA13.

Use of PRECIS ratings in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory

BACKGROUND

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (NIH Collaboratory) seeks to produce generalizable knowledge about the conduct of pragmatic research in health systems. This analysis applied the PRECIS-2 pragmatic trial criteria to five NIH Collaboratory pragmatic trials to better understand 1) the pragmatic aspects of the design and implementation of treatments delivered in real world settings and 2) the usability of the PRECIS-2 criteria for assessing pragmatic features across studies and across time.

METHODS/DESIGN

Using the PRECIS-2 criteria, five pragmatic trials were each rated by eight raters. For each trial, we reviewed the original grant application and a required progress report written at the end of a 1-year planning period that included changes to the protocol or implementation approach. We calculated median scores and interrater reliability for each PRECIS domain and for the overall trial at both time points, as well as the differences in scores between the two time points. We also reviewed the rater comments associated with the scores.

RESULTS

All five trials were rated to be more pragmatic than explanatory, with comments indicating that raters generally perceived them to closely mirror routine clinical care across multiple domains. The PRECIS-2 domains for which the trials were, on average, rated as most pragmatic on the 1 to 5 scale at the conclusion of the planning period included primary analysis (mean = 4.7 (range = 4.5 to 4.9)), recruitment (4.3 (3.6 to 4.8)), eligibility (4.1 (3.4 to 4.8)), setting (4.1 (4.0 to 4.4)), follow-up (4.1 (3.4 to 4.9)), and primary outcome (4.1 (3.5 to 4.9)). On average, the less pragmatic domains were organization (3.3 (2.6 to 4.4)), flexibility of intervention delivery (3.5 (2.1-4.5)), and flexibility of intervention adherence (3.8 (2.8-4.5)). Interrater agreement was modest but statistically significant for four trials (Gwet's AC1 statistic range 0.23 to 0.40) and the intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.05 to 0.31. Rating challenges included assigning a single score for domains that may relate to both patients and care settings (that is, eligibility or recruitment) and determining to what extent aspects of complex research interventions differ from usual care.

CONCLUSIONS

These five trials in diverse healthcare settings were rated as highly pragmatic using the PRECIS-2 criteria. Applying the tool generated insightful discussion about real-world design decisions but also highlighted challenges using the tool. PRECIS-2 raters would benefit from additional guidance about how to rate the interwoven patient and practice-level considerations that arise in pragmatic trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

Clinicaltrials.gov trial registrations: NCT02019225 , NCT01742065 , NCT02015455 , NCT02113592 , NCT02063867 .

Analytic Challenges Arising from the STOP CRC Trial: Pragmatic Solutions for Pragmatic Problems

CONTEXT

Pragmatic trials lack the relatively tight quality control of traditional efficacy studies and hence may pose added analytic challenges owing to the practical realities faced in carrying them out.

CASE DESCRIPTION

STOP CRC is a cluster randomized trial testing the effectiveness of automated, electronic medical record (EMR)-driven strategies to raise colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in safety net clinics. Screen-eligible participants were accrued during year 1 and followed for 12 months (measurement window) to assess completion of a fecal screening test. Control clinics implemented the intervention in year 2.

IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES/ANALYTIC ISSUES

Due to limitations on how we could build the intervention tools, the overlap of the year 1 measurement windows with year 2 intervention rollout posed a potential for contamination of the primary outcome for control participants. In addition, a variety of factors led to a lack of synchronization of the measurement windows with actual intervention delivery. In both cases, the net impact of these factors would be to diminish the estimated impact of the intervention.

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

We dealt with the overlap issue by delaying the start of intervention rollout to control clinics in year 2 by 6 months and by truncating the measurement windows for intervention and control participants at this point. In addition we formulated three sensitivity analyses to help address the issue of asynchronization.

CONCLUSION

This case study might help other investigators facing similar challenges think about such issues and the pros and cons of various strategies for dealing with them.

Family/friend recommendations and mammography intentions: the roles of perceived mammography norms and support

Identifying factors that increase mammography use among Latinas is an important public health priority. Latinas are more likely to report mammography intentions and use, if a family member or friend recommends that they get a mammogram. Little is known about the mechanisms underlying the relationship between social interactions and mammography intentions. Theory suggests that family/friend recommendations increase perceived mammography norms (others believe a woman should obtain a mammogram) and support (others will help her obtain a mammogram), which in turn increase mammography intentions and use. We tested these hypotheses with data from the ¡Fortaleza Latina! study, a randomized controlled trial including 539 Latinas in Washington State. Women whose family/friend recommended they get a mammogram within the last year were more likely to report mammography intentions, norms and support. Perceived mammography norms mediated the relationship between family/friend recommendations and intentions, Mediated Effect = 0.38, 95%CI [0.20, 0.61], but not support, Mediated Effect = 0.002, 95%CI [-0.07, 0.07]. Our findings suggest perceived mammography norms are a potential mechanism underlying the effect of family/friend recommendations on mammography use among Latinas. Our findings make an important contribution to theory about the associations of social interactions, perceptions and health behaviors.

Recruiting community health centers into pragmatic research: Findings from STOP CRC

BACKGROUND

Challenges of recruiting participants into pragmatic trials, particularly at the level of the health system, remain largely unexplored. As part of Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC), we recruited eight separate community health centers (consisting of 26 individual safety net clinics) into a large comparative effectiveness pragmatic study to evaluate methods of raising the rates of colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

In partnership with STOP CRC's advisory board, we defined criteria to identify eligible health centers and applied these criteria to a list of health centers in Washington, Oregon, and California affiliated with Oregon Community Health Information Network, a 16-state practice-based research network of federally sponsored health centers. Project staff contacted centers that met eligibility criteria and arranged in-person meetings of key study investigators with health center leadership teams. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to thematically analyze the content of discussions during these meetings to identify major facilitators of and barriers to health center participation.

RESULTS

From an initial list of 41 health centers, 11 met the initial inclusion criteria. Of these, leaders at three centers declined and at eight centers (26 clinic sites) agreed to participate (73%). Participating and nonparticipating health centers were similar with respect to clinic size, percent Hispanic patients, and percent uninsured patients. Participating health centers had higher proportions of Medicaid patients and higher baseline colorectal cancer screening rates. Common facilitators of participation were perception by center leadership that the project was an opportunity to increase colorectal cancer screening rates and to use electronic health record tools for population management. Barriers to participation were concerns of center leaders about ability to provide fecal testing to and assure follow-up of uninsured patients, limited clinic capacity to prepare mailings required by the study protocol, discomfort with randomization, and concerns about delaying program implementation at some clinics due to the research requirements.

CONCLUSION

Our findings address an important research gap and may inform future efforts to recruit community health centers into pragmatic research.

Trials without tribulations: Minimizing the burden of pragmatic research on healthcare systems

Pragmatic clinical trials are increasingly common because they have the potential to yield findings that are directly translatable to real-world healthcare settings. Pragmatic clinical trials need to integrate research into clinical workflow without placing an undue burden on the delivery system. This requires a research partnership between investigators and healthcare system representatives. This paper, organized as a series of case studies drawn from our experience in the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory, presents guidance from informational interviews of physician-scientists, health services researchers, and delivery system leaders who recently launched pragmatic clinical trials.

Health Policy to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening: Improving Access and Aligning Federal and State Incentives

Since implementation of the Affordable Care Act, 7 million+ individuals are newly covered on state-managed Medicaid programs and millions more on subsidized commercial insurance plans. We describe Oregon's experience in including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening as a measure for the state's new pay-for-performance Medicaid program. Using Oregon Health Authority data, we present 1) frequencies of Medicaid enrollees age-eligible for CRC screening, before and after Medicaid expansion; 2) CRC screening rates for 2011 and 2013; and 3) stakeholder perceptions about incentivizing CRC screening. Between December 2013 and June 2014, the size of the Medicaid-enrolled population age-eligible for CRC screening increased by 55% (104,920 to 163,078). Between 2011 and 2013, CRC screening rates improved by more than three percent for 6/15 (40%) CCOs; the majority of stakeholders surveyed (70%) supported the CRC screening metric. Inclusion of CRC screening as a Medicaid quality metric may present a unique opportunity to raise rates among historically underserved populations.

Variability in the take-home pathway: farmworkers and non-farmworkers and their children

Organophosphate pesticides (OPs) are related to ill health among adults, including farmworkers who are exposed to OPs as part of their regular work. Children of both farmworkers and non-farmworkers in agricultural communities may also be affected by pesticide exposure. Study groups of 100 farmworkers with a referent child (aged 2-6 years) and 100 non-farmworkers with a referent child were recruited to participate in three data collection periods over the course of a year. At each collection, participants provided three urine samples within 5 days, and homes and vehicles were vacuumed to collect pesticide residues in dust. In thinning and harvest seasons, farmworkers and their children had higher dimethyl urinary metabolites than non-farmworkers and their children. During the non-spray season, the urinary metabolites levels decreased among farmworkers to a level comparable to that of non-farmworkers. Farmworkers consistently had higher pesticide residues in their home and vehicle dust. Differences exist between farmworkers and non-farmworkers in urinary metabolites, and the differences extended throughout the agricultural seasons.OP metabolites are seen at much higher levels for farmworkers and their children than for non-farmworkers and their children during agricultural seasons when OPs are in use. These metabolite levels were significantly higher than the nationwide NHANES IV survey and up to 10-fold higher than other rural agricultural studies.