Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation to increase adherence with screening colonoscopy among minority individuals

Patient navigation job roles by levels of experience: Workforce Development Task Group, National Navigation Roundtable

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Cancer patient navigators work in diverse settings ranging from community-based programs to comprehensive cancer centers to improve outcomes in underserved populations by eliminating barriers to timely cancer prevention, early detection, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship in a culturally appropriate and competent manner. This article clarifies the roles and responsibilities of Entry, Intermediate, and Advanced level cancer patient navigators. The competencies described in this article apply to patient navigators, nurse navigators, and social work navigators. This article provides a resource for administrators to create job descriptions for navigators with specific levels of expertise and for patient navigators to advance their oncology careers and attain a higher level of expertise.

Modelling cost-effective strategies for minimising socioeconomic inequalities in colorectal cancer screening outcomes in England

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality is higher in socioeconomically deprived groups for a variety of reasons, but is exacerbated by poorer screening uptake. However, many strategies for improving screening participation exist. This analysis aimed to model the impact of screening on CRC inequalities in England and then compare different strategies for increasing participation, to determine the most cost-effective methods for reducing screening-induced inequalities. An existing health economic model, Microsimulation Model in Cancer of the Bowel was adapted. Screening-eligible individuals were simulated to investigate the impact of screening on CRC inequalities. Following this, four strategies for promoting screening participation were compared: 1) annual re-invitation of screening non-participants; 2) a national media advertising campaign; 3) text message reminders for non-participants; 4) health promotion in deprived populations. Cost-effectiveness, CRC outcomes, resource impacts and effects on CRC inequalities were assessed. Inequalities analysis was based on age-standardised CRC mortality by socioeconomic group. Screening was found to be highly cost-effective but CRC inequalities increased as screening effectiveness improved. Annual re-invitation of non-participants was most cost-effective for promoting particiption (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = £4404 per quality-adjusted life-year), reducing CRC mortality (11,129 deaths averted), and reducing screening-induced inequality (slope of inequalities reduced from 20.80 to 19.38), although it required 42% more screening kits to be sent out. Other strategies were cost-effective compared with screening alone, and improved CRC outcomes, but had varying impacts on inequalities. Whilst bowel cancer screening increases socioeconomic inequalities in CRC mortality, effective and cost-effective strategies are available for mitigating screening-induced inequalities.

Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015-2018

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs). This program provided an opportunity to assess the uptake of EBIs and SAs in 355 clinics that participated from 2015 to 2018.

INTERVENTION APPROACH

The 30 funded awardees of CRCCP partnered with clinics to implement at least 2 of 4 EBIs that CDC prioritized (patient reminders, provider reminders, reducing structural barriers, provider assessment and feedback) and 4 optional strategies that CDC identified as SAs (small media, professional development and provider education, patient navigation, and community health workers).

EVALUATION METHODS

Clinics completed 3 annual surveys to report uptake, implementation, and integration and perceived sustainability of the priority EBIs and SAs.

RESULTS

In our sample of 355 clinics, uptake of 4 EBIs and 2 SAs significantly increased over time. By year 3, 82% of clinics implemented patient reminder systems, 88% implemented provider reminder systems, 82% implemented provider assessment and feedback, 76% implemented activities to reduce structural barriers, 51% implemented provider education, and 84% used small media. Most clinics that implemented these strategies (>90%) considered them fully integrated into the health system or clinic operations and sustainable by year 3. Fewer clinics used patient navigation (30%) and community health workers (19%), with no increase over the years of the study.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

Clinics participating in the CRCCP reported high uptake and perceived sustainability of EBIs that can be integrated into electronic medical record systems but limited uptake of patient navigation and community health workers, which are uniquely suited to reduce cancer disparities. Future research should determine how to promote uptake and assess cost-effectiveness of CRCCP interventions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Community-to-Clinic Tailored Navigation for Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Underserved Population: Economic Evaluation Alongside a Group-Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

Although screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) lowers mortality and morbidity and is generally cost-effective, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of screening promotion.

DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a group-randomized trial. Setting: Multicultural, underinsured communities in the Phoenix, Arizona, area.

SUBJECTS

English- or Spanish-speaking adults who were out of compliance for CRC screening guidelines.

INTERVENTION

All participants received community-based group education (GE), and the intervention group also received tailored community-to-clinic navigation (GE+TN).

MEASURES

Number of participants screened and costs of tailored navigation, clinic visits, and CRC screening tests.

ANALYSIS

Incremental cost per additional person screened from the perspective of the healthcare system with bootstrapped confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Community sites were recruited and randomized to GE (n = 120) and GE + TN (n = 119). Across these sites 1154 individuals were screened, 504 were eligible, and 345 attended the group education class (n = 134 GE; n = 211 GE + TN). Screening rates (26.5% GE + TN; 10.4% GE; 16.1% increase 95% CI: 7%, 23%) and costs per participant ($271 GE + TN; $167 GE; a net cost increase of $104 95% CI: $1, $189) were significantly higher in the intervention group. Incremental cost-effectiveness was $646 (95% CI: -$68, $953) per additional person screened.

CONCLUSION

Depending on the value placed on an additional person screened, the addition of community-to-clinic tailored navigation to a community-based CRC screening promotion program may be highly cost-effective.

Engaging Community Health Workers to Increase Cancer Screening: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review

CONTEXT

The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends engaging community health workers to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings on the basis of strong evidence of effectiveness. This systematic review examines the economic evidence of these interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed with a search period through April 2019 to identify relevant economic evaluation studies. All monetary values were adjusted to 2018 U.S. dollars, and the analysis was completed in 2019.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 19 studies were included in the final analysis with 3 on breast cancer, 5 on cervical cancer, 9 on colorectal cancer, and 2 that combined costs for breast and cervical cancers and for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. For cervical cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year saved of $762 and $34,405. For colorectal cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported both a negative incremental cost and an increase in quality-adjusted life years saved with colonoscopy screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging community health workers to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screenings is cost effective on the basis of estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were less than the conservative $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year threshold. In addition, quality-adjusted life years saved from colorectal screening with colonoscopy were associated with net healthcare cost savings.

Bridging the Gap: Patient Navigation Increases Colonoscopy Follow-up After Abnormal FIT

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies indicate low rates of follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) within safety net health systems. A patient navigation (PN) program is an evidence-based strategy that has been shown to improve colonoscopy completion in private and public healthcare settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a PN program to encourage follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal FIT within a large safety net hospital system.

METHODS

We established an enterprisewide PN program at 5 tertiary care hospitals within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services system in 2018. The PN assisted adult patients aged 50-75 years with an abnormal FIT to a follow-up colonoscopy within 6 months. PN activities included initiating referral for and scheduling of colonoscopy, performing reminder phone calls to patient for their upcoming colonoscopy, and following up with patients who did not attend their colonoscopy. We assess the effectiveness of the PN intervention by comparing follow-up colonoscopy rates with a period before the intervention.

RESULTS

There were 2,531 patients with abnormal FIT results (n = 1,214 in 2017 and n = 1,317 in 2018). A majority were women (55% in 2017 vs 52% in 2018) with a mean age of 60 ± 6.2 years. From a previous mean of 163 days without PN in 2017, the mean time from abnormal FIT to colonoscopy with PN improved to 113 days in 2018. The frequency of colonoscopy completion with PN increased from 40.6% (n = 493) in 2017 to 46% (n = 600) in 2018.

DISCUSSION

After the introduction of the PN program, there was a significant increase in patients undergoing follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal FIT and patients were more likely to undergo colonoscopy within the recommended 6 months.

Effectiveness and Cost of Organized Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains underused, especially in safety-net systems. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of organized outreach using fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) compared with usual care.

METHODS

Patients age 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening from eight participating primary care safety-net clinics were randomly assigned to outreach intervention with usual care vs usual care alone. The intervention included a mailed postcard and call, followed by a mailed FIT kit, and a reminder phone call if the FIT kit was not returned. The primary outcome was screening participation at 1 year and a microcosting analysis of the outreach activities with embedded long-term cost-effectiveness of outreach. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

A total of 5386 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 5434 to usual care. FIT screening was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (57.9% vs 37.4%, P < .001; difference = 20.5%, 95% confidence interval = 18.6% to 22.4%). In the intervention group, FIT completion rate was higher in patients who had previously completed a FIT vs those who had not (71.9% vs 35.7%, P < .001). There was evidence of effect modification of the intervention by language, and clinic. Outreach cost approximately $23 per patient and $112 per additional patient screened. Projecting long-term outcomes, outreach was estimated to cost $9200 per quality-adjusted life-year gained vs usual care.

CONCLUSION

Population-based management with organized FIT outreach statistically significantly increased CRC screening and was cost-effective in a safety-net system. The sustainability of the program and any impact of economies of scale remain to be determined.

Cost-Effectiveness of Current Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests

Cost-effectiveness analysis compares benefits and costs of different interventions to inform decision makers. Alternatives are compared based on an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio reported in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Multiple cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have been performed. Although regional epidemiology of CRC, relevant screening strategies, regional health system, and applicable medical costs in local currencies differ by country and region, several overarching points emerge from literature on cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. Cost-effectiveness analysis informs decisions in ongoing debates, including preferred age to begin average-risk CRC screening, and implementation of CRC screening tailored to predicted CRC risk.

Proven Strategies for Increasing Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented or detected early through screening and surveillance, barriers that lower adherence to screening significantly limit its effectiveness. Therefore, implementation of interventions that address and overcome adherence barriers is critical to efforts to decrease morbidity and mortality from CRC. This article reviews the current available evidence about interventions to increase adherence to CRC screening.

Peer Support as an Ideal Solution for Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Evidence from a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low implementation of colorectal cancer screening in ethnic minorities is the main reason for racial and ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. Peer support is widely used for promoting health care in ethnic minorities. However, whether it improves their acceptance to undergo the screening remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a meta-analysis of the currently available studies to further explore its effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

This meta-analysis was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies that compared peer support interventions among ethnic minorities versus other interventions to promote uptake of colorectal cancer screening.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies comprising 8090 participants met the eligibility criteria. Peer support intervention can increase colorectal cancer screening implementation and raise awareness and intention to undergo the screening in ethnic minorities more significantly than fecal occult blood test outreach, print, and usual care. Subgroup analysis showed that peer support intervention achieved great results in Asian Americans and intervention of peer counseling.

LIMITATIONS

The results of subgroup analysis had substantial heterogeneity, which may decrease the precision of our estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Peer support can significantly improve the awareness about and the intention for receiving colorectal cancer screening in ethnic minorities and is an ideal choice for promoting the screening among ethnic minorities, particularly in a diverse community. Peer support intervention is recommended to promote the implementation of screening in Asian Americans. Peer counseling is worth promoting; however, church-based peer counseling programs require enhanced management to maintain their fidelity.

Evolution of a longitudinal, multidisciplinary, and scalable patient navigation matrix model

This Longitudinal patient navigation Matrix Model was developed to overcome barriers across the cancer care continuum by offering prepatients, patients, and their families with support services. The extraordinary heterogeneity of patient needs during cancer screening, risk assessment, treatment, and survivorship as well as the vast heterogeneity of oncology care settings make it nearly impossible to follow a static navigation model. Our model of patient cancer navigation is unique as it enhances the traditional model by being highly adaptable based on both patient and family needs and scalable based on institutional needs and resources (eg, clinical volumes, financial resources, and community‐based resources). This relatively new operational model for system‐wide and systematic navigation incorporates a carefully cultivated supportive care program that evolved over the last decade from a bottom up approach that identified patient and family needs and developed appropriate resources. A core component of this model includes shifting away from department‐centric operations. This model does not require a patient to opt in or independently be able to report their needs or ask for services—it is an opt out model. The multidisciplinary “cross‐training” model can also facilitate reimbursement and sustainability by clarifying the differentiating actions that define navigation services: identification of barriers to quality care and specific actions taken to overcome those barriers, across the full continue of cancer care from community engagement to survivorship or end‐of‐life care.

Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing worldwide. CRC has high mortality when detected at advanced stages, yet it is also highly preventable. Given the difficulties in implementing major lifestyle changes or widespread primary prevention strategies to decrease CRC risk, screening is the most powerful public health tool to reduce mortality. Screening methods are effective but have limitations. Furthermore, many screen-eligible people remain unscreened. We discuss established and emerging screening methods, and potential strategies to address current limitations in CRC screening. A quantum step in CRC prevention might come with the development of new screening strategies, but great gains can be made by deploying the available CRC screening modalities in ways that optimize outcomes while making judicious use of resources.

The case for philanthropic investment to increase colorectal cancer screening rates: A novel paradigm to address a public health challenge

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer‐related death despite being highly preventable. Efforts to increase participation in CRC screening have not met national goals. We developed a novel approach: building a business case for philanthropic investment in CRC screening.

Methods

A taskforce representing the public health community, professional societies, charitable foundations, academia, and industry was assembled to: (a) quantify the impact of improving CRC screening rates; (b) identify barriers to screening; (c) estimate the “activation cost” to overcome barriers and screen one additional person; (d) develop a holistic business case that is attractive to philanthropists; and (e) launch a demonstration project.

Results

We estimated that of 50 600 CRC deaths annually in the US, 55% occur in 50‐ to 85‐year‐olds and are potentially addressable by improvements in CRC screening. Barriers to screening were identified in all patient journey phases, including lack of awareness or insurance and logistical challenges in the pre‐physician phase. The cost to activate one person to undergo screening was $25‐175. This translated into a cost of $6000‐36 000 per CRC death averted by philanthropic investment. Based on this work, the Colorectal Cancer Alliance launched the effort “March Forth” to prevent 100 000 CRC deaths in the US over 10 years, with the first pilot in Philadelphia.

Conclusions

A holistic business plan can attract philanthropy to promote CRC screening. A simple message of “You can save a life from CRC with a $25 000 donation” can motivate demonstration projects in regions with high CRC rates and low screening participation.

Leveraging system sciences methods in clinical trial evaluation: An example concerning African American women diagnosed with breast cancer via the Patient Navigation in Medically Underserved Areas study

BACKGROUND

Systems science methodologies offer a promising assessment approach for clinical trials by: 1) providing an in-silico laboratory to conduct investigations where purely empirical research may be infeasible or unethical; and, 2) offering a more precise measurement of intervention benefits across individual, network, and population levels. We propose to assess the potential of systems sciences methodologies by quantifying the spillover effects of randomized controlled trial via empirical social network analysis and agent-based models (ABM).

DESIGN/METHODS

We will evaluate the effects of the Patient Navigation in Medically Underserved Areas (PNMUA) study on adult African American participants diagnosed with breast cancer and their networks through social network analysis and agent-based modeling. First, we will survey 100 original trial participants (50 navigated, 50 non-navigated) and 150 of members of their social networks (75 from navigated, 75 non-navigated) to assess if navigation results in: 1) greater dissemination of breast health information and breast healthcare utilization throughout the trial participants' networks; and, 2) lower incremental costs, when incorporating navigation effects on trial participants and network members. Second, we will compare cost-effectiveness models, using a provider perspective, incorporating effects on trial participants versus trial participants and network members. Third, we will develop an ABM platform, parameterized using published data sources and PNMUA data, to examine if navigation increases the proportion of early stage breast cancer diagnoses.

DISCUSSION

Our study results will provide promising venues for leveraging systems science methodologies in clinical trial evaluation.

Cost-Effectiveness and National Effects of Initiating Colorectal Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Persons at Age 45 Years Instead of 50 Years

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The American Cancer Society has recommended initiating colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at age 45 years instead of 50 years. We estimated the cost effectiveness and national effects of adopting this recommendation.

METHODS

We compared screening strategies and alternative resource allocations in a validated Markov model. We based national projections on screening participation rates by age and census data.

RESULTS

Screening colonoscopy initiation at age 45 years instead of 50 years in 1000 persons averted 4 CRCs and 2 CRC deaths, gained 14 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost $33,900/QALY gained, and required 758 additional colonoscopies. These 758 colonoscopies could instead be used to screen 231 currently unscreened 55-year-old persons or 342 currently unscreened 65-year-old persons, through age 75 years. These alternatives averted 13-14 CRC cases and 6-7 CRC deaths and gained 27-28 discounted QALYs while saving $163,700-$445,800. Improving colonoscopy completion rates after abnormal results from a fecal immunochemical test yielded greater benefits and savings. Initiation of fecal immunochemical testing at age 45 years instead of 50 years cost $7700/QALY gained. Shifting current age-specific screening rates to 5 years earlier could avert 29,400 CRC cases and 11,100 CRC deaths over the next 5 years but would require 10.7 million additional colonoscopies and cost an incremental $10.4 billion. Improving screening rates to 80% in persons who are 50-75 years old would avert nearly 3-fold more CRC deaths at one third the incremental cost.

CONCLUSIONS

In a Markov model analysis, we found that starting CRC screening at age 45 years is likely to be cost effective. However, greater benefit, at lower cost, could be achieved by increasing participation rates for unscreened older and higher-risk persons.

Long-Term Impact of a Culturally Tailored Patient Navigation Program on Disparities in Breast Cancer Screening in Refugee Women After the Program's End

Purpose: To examine the long-term effects of a patient navigation (PN) program for mammography screening tailored to refugee women and to assess screening utilization among these women after PN ended.

Methods: We assessed the proportion of patients completing mammography screening during the prior 2 years during 2012–2016 for refugee women who had previously received PN compared with that of English-speaking women cared for at the same health center during the same period, both overall and stratifying by age. We used logistic regression to compare screening completion between refugees and English speakers, adjusting for age, race, insurance status, number of clinic visits, and clustering by primary care physician and to test trends in screening over time.

Results: In 2012, the year when the funding for PN ceased, among 126 refugee women eligible for breast cancer screening, mammography screening rates were significantly higher among refugees (90.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 83.5–94.7%) than among English speakers (81.9%, 95% CI: 76.2–86.5%, p=0.006). By 2016, screening rates decreased among refugee women (76.5%, 95% CI: 61.6–86.9%, p=0.023) but were not statistically significantly different from those among English-speaking women (80.5%, 95% CI: 74.4–85.3%, p=0.460). Screening prevalence for refugee women remained above the pre-PN program screening levels, and considerably so in women <50 years.

Conclusion: The culturally and language-tailored PN program for refugee women appeared to have persistent effects, with refugee women maintaining similar levels of mammography screening to English-speaking patients 5 years after the PN program's end.

Economic assessment of patient navigation to colonoscopy-based colorectal cancer screening in the real-world setting at the University of Chicago Medical Center

BACKGROUND

This report details the cost effectiveness of a non-nurse patient navigation (PN) program that was implemented at the University of Chicago Medical Center to increase colonoscopy-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

The authors investigated the impact of the PN intervention by collecting process measures. Individuals who received navigation were compared with a historic cohort of non-navigated patients. In addition, a previously validated data-collection instrument was tailored and used to collect all costs related to developing, implementing, and administering the program; and the incremental cost per patient successfully navigated (the cost of the intervention divided by the change in the number who complete screening) was calculated.

RESULTS

The screening colonoscopy completion rate was 85.1% among those who were selected to receive PN compared with 74.3% when no navigation was implemented. With navigation, the proportion of no-shows was 8.2% compared with 15.4% of a historic cohort of non-navigated patients. Because the perceived risk of noncompletion was greater among those who received PN (previous no-show or cancellation, poor bowel preparation) than that in the historic cohort, a scenario analysis was performed. Assuming no-show rates between 0% and 50% and using a navigated rate of 85%, the total incremental program cost per patient successfully navigated ranged from $148 to $359, whereas the incremental intervention-only implementation cost ranged from $88 to $215.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings indicate that non-nurse PN can increase colonoscopy completion, and this can be achieved at a minimal incremental cost for an insured population at an urban academic medical center.

Economic evaluation of patient navigation programs in colorectal cancer care, a systematic review

Patient navigation has expanded as a promising approach to improve cancer care coordination and patient adherence. This paper addresses the need to identify the evidence on the economic impact of patient navigation in colorectal cancer, following the Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines. Articles indexed in Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Web of Science between January 2000 and March 2017 were analyzed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality assessment of the included studies was based on the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Inclusion criteria indicated that the paper's subject had to explicitly address patient navigation in colorectal cancer and the study had to be an economic evaluation. The search yielded 243 papers, 9 of which were finally included within this review. Seven out of the nine studies included met standards for high-quality based on CHEERS criteria. Eight concluded that patient navigation programs were unequivocally cost-effective for the health outcomes of interest. Six studies were cost-effectiveness analyses. All studies computed the direct costs of the program, which were defined a minima as the program costs. Eight of the reviewed studies adopted the healthcare system perspective. Direct medical costs were usually divided into outpatient and inpatient visits, tests, and diagnostics. Effectiveness outcomes were mainly assessed through screening adherence, quality of life and time to diagnostic resolution. Given these outcomes, more economic research is needed for patient navigation during cancer treatment and survivorship as well as for patient navigation for other cancer types so that decision makers better understand costs and benefits for heterogeneous patient navigation programs.

Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers by Two Methods

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is commonly diagnosed in the USA despite screening tests that have decreased CRC incidence and mortality. Finding the best method to identify patient-level screening barriers is important to improve CRC screening rates. A group-randomized trial was conducted among ten primary-care clinics. Clinics were randomized to a multi-level (clinic, provider, patient) CRC screening intervention or usual care (2007-2013). Subsequent to clinic- and provider-level interventions, a three-step, patient-level intervention was conducted. One step of the patient-level intervention was a CRC screening barriers counseling call conducted by a lay health advisor (LHA). During the call, two methods were used to identify CRC screening barriers. An open-ended question was used first to determine why participants had not completed screening (without probes). Subsequently, the LHA read a list of additional potential screening barriers and asked participants whether each barrier was applicable (with probes). A generalized estimating equation approach was used to compare the two methods. Participants (n = 109) were female (59%), had a mean age of 57.2 years, and were white (67%) or black (31%). Most participants had some college education or a college degree (79%), annual household income $30,000+ (60%), and health insurance (80%). The number of CRC screening barriers increased with probing compared to the open-ended question format (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.92-2.31; p < 0.01). The ranking of reported CRC screening barriers did not vary by assessment method. However, the methodology used to document CRC screening barriers may influence the content of patient-directed interventions.

The Role of Patient Navigation on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion and Education: a Review of the Literature

Although the general assumption is that patient navigation helps patients adhere to CRC screening recommendations, concrete evidence for its effectiveness is still currently under investigation. The present literature review was conducted to explore effectiveness of patient navigation and education on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening completion in medically underserved populations. Data collection included PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane reviews searches. Study inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials and prospective investigations that included an intervention and control group. Case series, brief communications, commentaries, case reports, and uncontrolled studies were excluded. Twenty-seven of the 36 studies screened for relevance were selected for inclusion. Most studies explored the utility of lay and clinic-based patient navigation. Others implemented interventions that included tailored messaging, and culturally and linguistically appropriate outreach and education efforts to meet CRC screening needs of medically underserved individuals. More recent studies have begun to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses of patient navigation programs that impacted CRC screening and completion. Peer-reviewed publications consistently indicate a positive impact of patient navigation programs on CRC screening completion, as well have provided preliminary evidence for their cost-effectiveness.

Costs of promoting cancer screening: Evidence from CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP)

The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) provided funding to 29 grantees to increase colorectal cancer screening. We describe the screening promotion costs of CRCCP grantees to evaluate the extent to which the program model resulted in the use of funding to support interventions recommended by the Guide to Community Preventive Services (Community Guide). We analyzed expenditures for screening promotion for the first three years of the CRCCP to assess cost per promotion strategy, and estimated the cost per person screened at the state level based on various projected increases in screening rates. All grantees engaged in small media activities and more than 90% used either client reminders, provider assessment and feedback, or patient navigation. Based on all expenditures, projected cost per eligible person screened for a 1%, 5%, and 10% increase in state-level screening proportions are $172, $34, and $17, respectively. CRCCP grantees expended the majority of their funding on Community Guide recommended screening promotion strategies but about a third was spent on other interventions. Based on this finding, future CRC programs should be provided with targeted education and information on evidence-based strategies, rather than broad based recommendations, to ensure that program funds are expended mainly on evidence-based interventions.

A systematic model improves hepatitis C virus birth cohort screening in hospital-based primary care

Despite national and local governing board recommendations in the United States of America to perform an HCV screening test in baby boomers, screening rates remain low. Our goal was to study the impact of an HCV screening and link-to-care programme with patient navigation in two New York City primary care practices. This was a 2-year prospective study of patients born between 1945-1965 ("baby boomers") with encounters at two primary care practices at the Mount Sinai Hospital between November 1, 2013 and November 30, 2015. Baseline HCV screening rates were collected for four months. A multifaceted intervention was sequentially implemented involving electronic alerts, housestaff education, data feedback and patient navigation. HCV screening rates and link to care, defined as attending an appointment with a viral hepatitis specialist, were compared before and after these interventions. There were 14 642 primary care baby boomer patients of which 4419 (30.2%) were newly screened during the study. There was a significant increase in HCV screening rates from 55% to 75% (P<.01) with an HCV seropositive rate of 3.3%. Factors associated with being HCV seropositive included older age (P<.01), male sex (P<.01), African American race (P<.01) and receiving care in the housestaff practice (P<.01). With patient navigation, 78 of 84 (93%) newly diagnosed HCV-infected persons were referred to a specialist and 60 (77%) attended their first appointment. A structured, multifaceted HCV screening programme using well-studied principles identifies a large number of undiagnosed baby boomers within hospital-based primary care and improves access to specialty providers in a timely manner.

Appointment-keeping behaviors and procedure day are associated with colonoscopy attendance in a patient navigator population

BACKGROUND

Patient navigator programs (PNP) have been shown to improve colonoscopy completion with demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Despite additional resources available to these patients, many still do not attend their colonoscopies. The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with colonoscopy attendance amongst patients in whom logistical barriers to attendance have been minimized through enrollment in a PNP.

METHODS

Retrospective case-control study of patients enrolled in a PNP for colonoscopy performed at a tertiary endoscopy center from 2009 to 2014. Cases were defined as patients who did not attend their first scheduled colonoscopy after PNP enrollment. Age- and gender-matched controls completed their first scheduled colonoscopy after PNP enrollment.

RESULTS

514 subjects (257 cases, mean age 57.1years, 36.6% males) were included. Patients who attended their colonoscopy were less likely to be Spanish-speaking (64.6% vs 78.2%, p=0.0003) and uninsured (0.4% vs 3.9%, p=0.006). Attendance rates were significantly lower for screening colonoscopies compared to an indication of surveillance or diagnostic (45.5% vs 65.3%, p<0.0001). Fewer patients attended colonoscopies scheduled on Monday (39.2% vs 52.1%, p=0.04) and in December (10.7% vs 52.3%, p<0.0001). On multivariate analysis, poor appointment-keeping behaviors, including a prior missed colonoscopy (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.39) or missed office visit (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.73) and procedures scheduled on Mondays (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27-0.94) were negatively associated with attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

Appointment-keeping behaviors, in addition to insurance-status, language-barriers and medical comorbidities, influence colonoscopy attendance in a PNP population. Patients scheduled for colonoscopies on Mondays or in December may require more resources to ensure attendance.

The effectiveness of patient navigation to improve healthcare utilization outcomes: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of patient navigation (PN) on healthcare utilization outcomes using meta-analysis and the quality of evidence.

METHODS

Medical and social science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English between 1989 and May 2015. The review process was guided by PRISMA. Included studies were assessed for quality using the Downs and Black tool. Data were extracted to assess the effect of navigation on: health screening rates, diagnostic resolution, cancer care follow-up treatment adherence, and attendance of care events. Random-effects models were used to compute risk ratios and I² statistics determined the impact of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of 3985 articles screened, 25 articles met inclusion criteria. Compared to usual care, patients who received PN were significantly more likely to access health screening (OR 2.48, 95% CI, 1.93-3.18, P<0.00001) and attend a recommended care event (OR 2.55, 95% CI, 1.27-5.10, P<0.01). PN was favoured to increase adherence to cancer care follow-up treatment and obtain diagnoses. Most studies involved trained lay navigators (n=12) compared to health professionals (n=9).

CONCLUSION

PN is effective to increase screening rates and complete care events.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PN is an effective intervention for use in healthcare.

Inadequate Utilization of Diagnostic Colonoscopy Following Abnormal FIT Results in an Integrated Safety-Net System

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is contingent on colonoscopy completion in patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Understanding system and patient factors affecting follow-up of abnormal screening tests is essential to optimize care for high-risk cohorts.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in an integrated safety-net system comprised of 11 primary-care clinics and one Gastroenterology referral unit and included patients 50-75 years, with a positive FIT between April 2012 and February 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 2,238 patients identified, 1,245 (55.6%) completed their colonoscopy within 1-year of the positive FIT. The median time from positive FIT to colonoscopy was 184 days (interquartile range 140-232). Of the 13% of FIT positive patients not referred to gastroenterology, 49% lacked documentation addressing their abnormal result or counseling on the increased risk of CRC. Of the patients referred but who missed their appointments, 62% lacked documentation following up on the abnormal result in the absence of a completed colonoscopy. FIT positive patients never referred to gastroenterology or who missed their appointment after referrals were more likely to have comorbid conditions and documented illicit substance use compared with patients who completed a colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite access to colonoscopy and a shared electronic health record system, colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT is inadequate within this safety-net system. Inadequate follow-up is in part explained by inappropriate screening, but there is an absence of clear documentation and systematic workflow within both primary care and GI specialty care addressing abnormal FIT results.

Editorial: Financial Incentives to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening: Does it Make Cents?

While colorectal cancer screening reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, there is much room for improvement in screening adherence particularly among the uninsured and ethnic minorities. In this issue, Gupta et al. conducted a randomized controlled study to test the impact of a small financial incentive on screening adherence. Their negative study, taken in the context of prior studies and behavioral economics literature, leads us to conclude that it does not pay to add this small financial incentive to community outreach. Instead, we should invest in a systematic approach to screening, including patient navigation.

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of a Multitarget Stool DNA Test to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We developed a model to determine whether a multitarget stool DNA (MT-sDNA) test that detects colorectal cancer (CRC) and polyps with higher sensitivity and lower specificity, but at a higher cost, than the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) can be used in screening.

METHODS

We used a Markov model of average-risk CRC screening to compare the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of screening with the MT-sDNA test vs FIT or colonoscopy. We accounted for the complex longitudinal participation patterns observed in organized programs vs opportunistic screening, as well as organized programs' patient support costs and differential payment rates by commercial insurers vs Medicare.

RESULTS

With optimal adherence, yearly FIT and colonoscopy every 10 years were dominant (more effective and less costly) than MT-sDNA every 3 years. Compared with successful organized FIT programs (50% consistent and 27% intermittent participation; patient support costs, $153/cycle), the patient support program for the MT-sDNA test would need 68% of subjects to participate consistently and 32% to participate intermittently every 3 years, or the MT-sDNA test would need to cost 60% less than in the base case ($260 commercial payment and $197 Medicare payment), for the MT-sDNA test to be preferred over FIT at a threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Compared with opportunistic yearly FIT screening (15% consistent and 30% intermittent participation), performing the MT-sDNA test every 3 years would cost less than $100,000 per QALY gained if the MT-sDNA test achieved a participation rate more than 1.7-fold that of FIT. The results were robust in sensitivity analyses. Assuming equal participation across strategies and a threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained, FIT was preferred in 99.3% of iterations in Monte Carlo simulation.

CONCLUSIONS

In a Markov model, we found FIT and colonoscopy to be more effective and less costly than the MT-sDNA test when participation rates were equal for all strategies. For the MT-sDNA test to be cost effective, the patient support program included in its cost would need to achieve substantially higher participation rates than those of FIT, whether in organized programs or under the opportunistic screening setting that is more common in the United States than in the rest of the world.

Patient-Reported Attributions for Missed Colonoscopy Appointments in Two Large Healthcare Systems

BACKGROUND

Missed colonoscopy appointments (no-shows) can lead to wasted resources and delays in colorectal cancer diagnosis, an area of special concern in public health systems that often provide care for vulnerable patients. Our objective was to identify reasons for missed colonoscopy appointments in patients seeking care at two large public health systems in Houston, TX.

METHODS

We conducted a telephone survey of patients who missed their colonoscopy appointments at two tertiary care health systems. Using a structured survey instrument, we collected information on patient-specific and health services barriers. Patient-specific barriers included perceived procedural-related factors (e.g., difficulty in preparation), cognitive-emotional factors (e.g., fear or concern about modesty), and changes in health status (e.g., improvement or worsening of health). Health services barriers included logistical factors (e.g., travel-related difficulties) and appointment scheduling problems (inconvenient date or time). We examined differences in attributions for missed appointments between the two study sites.

RESULTS

Of 160 unique patients (102 Site A and 58 Site B) who missed their appointment during the study period, 153 (95.6 %) attributed their no-show to at least one of the listed barriers. Most respondents (125; 78.1 %) cited travel-related issues or scheduling problems as reasons for their missed appointment. Not having a ride or a travel companion was the most commonly reported travel-related issue. We also found significant differences for barriers between the two sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Most missed colonoscopy appointments resulted from potentially preventable travel- and scheduling-related issues. Because barriers to keeping colonoscopy appointments are different across health systems, each health system might need to develop unique interventions to reduce missed colonoscopy appointments.

A Patient Navigation Model for Veterans Traveling for Cancer Care

Cancer care navigation teams can address patient needs and break down barriers to care in veteran patients with cancer.

New York Citywide Colon Cancer Control Coalition: A public health effort to increase colon cancer screening and address health disparities

BACKGROUND

Although screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a widely accepted concept nationally and screening rates are increasing, there are differences in screening rates between states and within states.

METHODS

In an effort to increase screening rates and ensure equal access with respect to race/ethnicity, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene formed a coalition of stakeholders in 2003, with its primary focus on colonoscopy, to develop and implement strategies across the city to achieve this goal.

RESULTS

From a screening colonoscopy rate of only 42% in 2003, these concerted efforts contributed to achieving a screening rate of 62% by 2007 and a screening rate of almost 70% in 2014 with the elimination of racial and ethnic disparities.

CONCLUSIONS

This article provides details of how this program was successfully conceived, implemented, and sustained in the large urban population of New York City. The authors hope that by sharing the many elements involved and the lessons learned, they may help other communities to adapt these experiences to their own environments so that CRC screening rates can be maximized. Cancer 2016;122:269-277. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Knowledge of Polyp History and Recommended Follow-Up Among a Predominately African American Patient Population and the Impact of Patient Navigation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal screening (CRS) rates in minority and uninsured populations have increased through patient navigation (PN) interventions. However, patient knowledge of colonoscopy results and follow-up recommendations has not been described in an African American (AA) population or following PN. Our objectives were to determine patient knowledge of colonoscopy results and follow-up recommendations within an AA patient population and to compare post-colonoscopy knowledge among patients who received either PN or usual care.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study of patients who completed a screening colonoscopy in 2014. A semi-structured telephone survey was completed by 96 participants (69 % AA, 78 % female, and mean age 63 years). The survey assessed patient recall of polyp results and follow-up recommendations. Responses were compared with the medical record.

RESULTS

Of 96 patients surveyed (response rate, 68 %), 83 % accurately reported if polyps were detected and 66 % accurately reported their recommended follow-up. The identification of adenomatous polyps on colonoscopy was a predictor of accurate recall of colonoscopy results and follow-up recommendations. Uninsured patients who completed PN (18 of 96) were more likely to accurately report polyp results (100 vs. 80 %; P = 0.036), but the rates of accurate follow-up recall were not statistically significant (44 vs. 71 %; P = 0.053) when compared to usual care patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In an AA population, post-colonoscopy polyp recall rates were similar to those described in white populations. Uninsured patients who completed PN were more likely than insured usual care patients to accurately report the presence of polyps on colonoscopy.