Get screened: a randomized trial of the incremental benefits of reminders, recall, and outreach on cancer screening

Evaluating the Reach of a Patient Navigation Program for Follow-up Colonoscopy in a Large Federally Qualified Health Center

Patient navigation (PN) has been shown to improve participation in cancer screening, including colorectal cancer screening, and is now a recommended practice by the Community Preventive Services Task Force. Despite the effectiveness of PN programs, little is known about the number of contacts needed to successfully reach patients or about the demographic and healthcare utilization factors associated with reach. PRECISE was an individual randomized study of PN versus usual care conducted as a partnership between two large health systems in the Pacific Northwest. The navigation program was a six-topic area telephonic program designed to support patients with an abnormal fecal test result to obtain a follow-up colonoscopy. We report the number of contact attempts needed to successfully reach navigated patients. We used logistic regression to report the demographic and healthcare utilization characteristics associated with patients allocated to PN who were successfully reached. We identified 1,200 patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test result, of whom 970 were randomized into the study (45.7% were female, 17.5% were Spanish-speaking, and the mean age was 60.8 years). Of the 479 patients allocated to the PN intervention, 382 (79.7%) were reached within 18 call attempts, and nearly all (n = 356; 93.2%) were reached within six contact attempts. Patient characteristics associated with reach were race, county of residence, and body mass index. Our findings can guide future efforts to optimize the reach of PN programs. Prevention Relevance: The findings from this large study can inform clinic-level implementation of future PN programs in Federally Qualified Health Centers to improve the reach of patients needing cancer screenings, optimize staff resources, and ultimately increase cancer screenings.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Adults in Zuni Pueblo: Factors Associated with FOBT and Colonoscopy Utilization

Although strategies to mitigate barriers to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have proven successful in some parts of the US, few of these strategies have been studied in rural, American Indian communities that may exhibit unique culturally driven attitudes toward and knowledge of colorectal cancer and experience increased barriers to healthcare access. In this study, we describe the results of a survey among CRC screen-eligible members of Zuni Pueblo (N = 218) on an array of questions regarding CRC screening behaviors, knowledge, satisfaction with and access to healthcare services, social support for CRC screening, perceptions toward FOBT, and preference for evidence-based interventions or strategies for improving CRC screening rates. Results from the multivariable model suggest age, having a regular healthcare provider, and harboring fewer negative perceptions toward FOBT are key drivers of ever completing CRC screening. Respondents reported strong support for Community Guide-recommended interventions and strategies for increasing CRC screening for nearly all proposed interventions. Results confirm the need for multilevel, multicomponent interventions, with a particular focus on improving Zuni Pueblo community members' access to a regular source of care, improving knowledge of CRC risk factor, and addressing negative perceptions toward CRC screening. These results provide critical, community-specific insight into better understanding the drivers of low guideline-adherent screening rates and inform local healthcare providers and community leaders of context-specific strategies to improve CRC screening in Zuni Pueblo.

Automated Emails to Improve Evening Staffing for Anesthesiologists

Scheduling flexibility and predictability to the end of a clinical workday are strategies aimed at addressing physician burnout. A voluntary relief shift was created to increase the pool of anesthesiologists providing end of the day relief. We hypothesized that an automated email reminder would improve the number of evening relief shifts filled and increase the number of anesthesiologists participating in the program. An automated email reminder was implemented, which selectively emailed anesthesiologists without a clinical assignment one day in advance when the voluntary relief shifts were not filled, and anticipated case volume past 4:00 PM was expected to exceed the capacity of the on-call team. After implementation of the automated email reminder, the median number of providers who worked the relief shift on a typical day was 2.6, compared to 1.75 prior to the intervention. After the initial increase in the number of volunteers post-intervention, the trend in the weekly average number of volunteers tended to decrease but remained higher than before the intervention. A total of 22 unique anesthesiologists chose to participate in this program after the intervention. An automated email reminder increased the number of anesthesiologists volunteering for a relief shift. Leveraging automation to match staffing needs with case volume allows for recruitment of additional personnel on the days when volunteers are most needed. Increasing the pool of anesthesiologists available to provide relief is one strategy to improve end of the day predictability and work-life balance.

Motivational Interviewing to Improve the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Colorectal cancer screening when done early can significantly reduce mortality. However, screening compliance is still lower than expected even in countries with established screening programs. Motivational interviewing is an approach that has been explored to promote behavioral change including screening compliance. This review synthesizes the efficacy of motivational interviewing in promoting uptake of colorectal screening modalities and is the only review so far that examines motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening alone.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effects of motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening. PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched to identify eligible studies from inception to June 2021 and selection criteria was defined. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The DerSimonian and Laird random effects model was used in the statistical analysis for studies included in the meta-analysis.

Results

Fourteen studies from 14 randomized-controlled trials with a low to moderate risk of bias were analyzed. 8 studies in the systematic review showed that motivational interviewing is superior to a control group. Meta-analysis was conducted on 11 studies and showed that motivational interviewing is statistically significant in increasing colorectal cancer screening rates in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis. Timing of data collection of colorectal cancer screening rates did not make a significant difference to the efficacy of motivational interviewing. Studies that offered and accepted a mixture of colorectal screening modalities such as colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical tests were significantly more likely to have favorable colorectal screening outcomes. Heterogeneity in intervention was noted between studies, specifically differences in the training of interventionists, intervention delivery and comparator components.

Conclusion

Motivational interviewing is a tailored intervention demonstrating mixed evidence in improving colorectal cancer screening attendance amongst individuals. More research is needed to rigorously compare the effect of motivational interviewing alone vs. in combination with other screening promotion strategies to enhance colorectal cancer screening compliance.

A stepped randomized trial to promote colorectal cancer screening in a nationwide sample of U.S. Veterans

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (CRCS) facilitates early detection and lowers CRC mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To increase CRCS in a randomized trial of stepped interventions. Step 1 compared three modes of delivery of theory-informed minimal cue interventions. Step 2 was designed to more intensively engage those not completing CRCS after Step 1.

METHODS

Recruitment packets (60,332) were mailed to a random sample of individuals with a record of U.S. military service during the Vietnam-era. Respondents not up-to-date with CRCS were randomized to one of four Step 1 groups: automated telephone, telephone, letter, or survey-only control. Those not completing screening after Step 1 were randomized to one of three Step 2 groups: automated motivational interviewing (MI) call, counselor-delivered MI call, or Step 2 control. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses assessed CRCS on follow-up surveys mailed after each step.

RESULTS

After Step 1 (n = 1784), CRCS was higher in the letter, telephone, and automated telephone groups (by 1%, 5%, 7%) than in survey-only controls (43%), although differences were not statistically significant. After Step 2 (n = 516), there were nonsignificant increases in CRCS in the two intervention groups compared with the controls. CRCS following any combination of stepped interventions overall was 7% higher (P = 0.024) than in survey-only controls (55.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide study of Veterans, CRCS after each of two stepped interventions of varying modes of delivery did not differ significantly from that in controls. However, combined overall, the sequence of stepped interventions significantly increased CRCS.

What Multilevel Interventions Do We Need to Increase the Colorectal Cancer Screening Rate to 80%?

Screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality; however, this remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States and adherence to colorectal cancer screening falls far short of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of 80%. Numerous studies have examined the effectiveness of interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening uptake. Outreach is the active dissemination of screening outside of the primary care setting, such as mailing fecal blood tests to individuals' homes. Navigation uses trained personnel to assist individuals through the screening process. Patient education may take the form of brochures, videos, or websites. Provider education can include feedback about screening rates of patient panels. Reminders to healthcare providers can be provided by dashboards of patients due for screening. Financial incentives provide monetary compensation to individuals when they complete screening tests, either as fixed payments or via a lottery. Individual preference for specific screening strategies has also been examined in several trials, with a choice of screening strategies yielding higher adherence than recommendation of a single strategy.

Effectiveness of motivational interviewing in enhancing cancer screening uptake amongst average-risk individuals: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although cancer is a worldwide public health problem, it can be detected early and prevented through cancer screening. Recommendations for screening methods and screening intervals are currently available for several types of cancer. However, not all average-risk individuals are motivated to undergo cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of motivational interviewing that targets average-risk individuals regarding their cancer screening intention and uptake and to provide recommendations for the content and format of motivational interviewing based on the existing evidence.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using four databases and a manual search. A combination of keywords including 'motivational interviewing', 'cancer screening', 'screening intention' and 'screening uptake' were used to identify relevant articles. Only randomised controlled trials that examined the effects of motivational interviewing amongst average-risk individuals were included in the review. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the selected articles. The findings were summarised in narrative and tabular formats.

RESULTS

Six randomised controlled trials that used motivational interviewing to enhance cancer screening uptake or intention were included in the review. The findings show that motivational interviewing that used a face-to-face and telephone-based approach or were used together with a tailored or reminder letter enhanced the participants' uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening and their intention to undergo future cervical cancer screening. Mixed results were observed in the effectiveness of single-contact motivational interviewing on colorectal cancer screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of motivational interviewing has demonstrated improvements in the uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening. However, more research is warranted in view of the inconclusive findings noted for colorectal cancer screening. Further studies with more rigorous methods are needed to identify the most effective interventions and to test the feasibility and efficiency of the use of Internet-based information communication technology to deliver motivational interviewing.

Effectiveness of Patient Navigation to Increase Cancer Screening in Populations Adversely Affected by Health Disparities: a Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the effectiveness of patient navigation to increase screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer in populations adversely affected by health care disparities.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified through English-language searches of Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, SocINDEX, and Veterans Affairs Health Services database (January 1, 1996, to July 5, 2019) and manual review of reference lists. Randomized trials and observational studies of relevant populations that evaluated the effectiveness of patient navigation on screening rates for colorectal, breast, or cervical cancer compared with usual or alternative care comparison groups were included. Two investigators independently abstracted study data and assessed study quality and applicability using criteria adapted from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. Results were combined using profile likelihood random effects models.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria (28 colorectal, 11 breast, 4 cervical cancers including 3 trials with multiple cancer types). Screening rates were higher with patient navigation for colorectal cancer overall (risk ratio [RR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42 to 1.92; I² = 93.7%; 22 trials) and by type of test (fecal occult blood or immunohistochemistry testing [RR 1.69; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.15; I² = 80.5%; 6 trials]; colonoscopy/endoscopy [RR 2.08; 95% CI 1.08 to 4.56; I² = 94.6%; 6 trials]). Screening was also higher with navigation for breast cancer (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; I² = 98.6%; 10 trials) and cervical cancer (RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19; based on the largest trial). The high heterogeneity of cervical cancer studies prohibited meta-analysis. Results were similar for colorectal and breast cancer regardless of prior adherence to screening guidelines, follow-up time, and study quality.

CONCLUSIONS

In populations adversely affected by disparities, colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening rates were higher in patients provided navigation services. Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42018109263.

Improving Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Rural Setting: A Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer screening has been shown to prevent or detect early colorectal cancer and reduce mortality; yet, adherence to screening recommendations remains low, particularly in rural settings.

STUDY DESIGN

RCT.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Adults (n=7,812) aged 50-75 years and due for colorectal cancer screening in a largely rural health system were randomly assigned to either the intervention (n=3,906) or the control (n=3,906) group in September 2016, with analysis following through 2018.

INTERVENTION

A mailed motivational messaging screening reminder letter with an option to call and request a free at-home fecal immunochemical screening test (intervention) or the standard invitation letter detailing that the individual was due for screening (control). Multifaceted motivational messaging emphasized colorectal cancer preventability and the ease and affordability of screening, and communicated a limited supply of test kits.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Colorectal cancer screening participation within 6 months after mailed invitation was ascertained from the electronic medical record.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer screening participation was significantly improved in the intervention (30.1%) vs the usual care control group (22.5%; p<0.001). Individuals randomized to the intervention group had 49% higher odds of being screened over follow-up than those randomized to the control group (OR=1.49, 95% CI=1.34, 1.65). A total of 13.2 screening invitations were needed to accomplish 1 additional screening over the usual care. Of the 233 fecal immunochemical test kits mailed to participants, 154 (66.1%) were returned, and 18 (11.7%) tested positive.

CONCLUSIONS

A mailed motivational messaging letter with a low-cost screening alternative increased colorectal cancer screening in this largely rural community with generally poor adherence to screening recommendations. Mailed colorectal cancer screening reminders using motivational messaging may be an effective method for increasing screening and reducing rural colorectal cancer disparities.

Colonoscopy education delivered via the patient portal does not improve adherence to scheduled first-time screening colonoscopy

Background and study aims  Non-adherence to scheduled colonoscopy burdens endoscopic practices and innovative approaches to improve adherence are needed. We aimed to assess the effect of an educational video emphasizing colonoscopy importance delivered through the electronic health record patient portal upon "no-show" and late cancellation rates (non-adherence) in patients scheduled for first-time screening colonoscopy. Patients and methods  We conducted a single center randomized controlled trial among patients scheduled for their first screening colonoscopy. Patients were randomized to routine care ("control") or video education ("video"). Control patients received a portal message 14 days prior to colonoscopy date; video patients additionally received a link to the educational video. Results  In total, 830 patients (59 % female, median age 55 years) were randomized ("control": 406; "video": 424). Nearly all (88 %) opened the message; in the video arm, most (72 %) watched a majority of the video. Overall, 80 % attended their scheduled colonoscopy appointment (late cancel: 18 %, "no show": 1 %) and 90 % underwent colonoscopy within 3 months of appointment. Adherence rates did not differ between video and control arms for the scheduled appointment (OR 1.2, CI 0.9-1.8) or for colonoscopy within 3 months of scheduled appointment (OR 1.3, CI 0.8-2.1). Bowel preparation quality did not differ between the groups. Conclusion  Most patients scheduled for colonoscopy will open a patient portal message and, when delivered, watch an educational video. However, delivery of an educational video two weeks prior to screening colonoscopy appointment did not improve adherence.

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations in the United States experience disparities in the use of preventive health services.

PURPOSE

To examine effects of barriers that create health disparities in 10 recommended preventive services for adults, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services database (1 January 1996 to 5 July 2019); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials, observational studies with comparison groups, and systematic reviews of populations adversely affected by disparities that reported effects of barriers on use of any of the 10 selected preventive services or that reported the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities in use of a preventive service by improving intermediate or clinical outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Dual extraction and assessment of study quality, strength of evidence, and evidence applicability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No studies reported effects of provider-specific barriers on preventive service use. Eighteen studies reporting effects of patient barriers, such as insurance coverage or lack of a regular provider, on preventive service use had mixed and inconclusive findings. Studies of patient-provider interventions (n = 12), health information technologies (n = 11), and health system interventions (n = 88) indicated higher cancer screening rates with patient navigation; telephone calls, prompts, and other outreach methods; reminders involving lay health workers; patient education; risk assessment, counseling, and decision aids; screening checklists; community engagement; and provider training. Single studies showed that clinician-delivered and technology-assisted interventions improved rates of smoking cessation and weight loss, respectively.

LIMITATION

Insufficient or low strength of evidence and applicability for most interventions except patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers.

CONCLUSION

In populations adversely affected by disparities, patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers increase cancer screening.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109263).

Effects of different reminder strategies on first-time mammography screening among women in Taiwan

Background

The study’s purpose was to examine the effectiveness of different reminder strategies on first-time free mammography screening among middle-aged women in Taiwan.

Methods

A quasi-experimental design with random assignment was adopted to divide the participants into three Reminder Strategies groups (mail reminder, telephone reminder, and combined mail and telephone reminders) and one control group. This study recruited 240 eligible middle-aged women, and 205 of them completed the study. Upon the completion of data collection, mail reminders were provided to women of the first group; telephone reminders were provided to the second group; mail followed by telephone reminders were provided to the third group, and the usual postcards were provided to the control group 1 month after the interventions. Two follow-up assessments were conducted 1 and 3 months after the intervention to collect mammography-screening behaviors from all groups.

Results

The findings showed that, compared to the control group, more participants in the intervention groups underwent mammography screening after receiving reminder interventions. Telephone contact as reminder was found to have the most significant influence among the interventions (OR = 5.0556; 95% CI = 2.0422–13.5722).

Conclusions

Government and healthcare providers are recommended to consider adopting the telephone reminder strategy to encourage women to undergo their first-time mammography screening.

Follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening in rural community clinics: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Significant disparities exist in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates among those of low socioeconomic status, with fewer years of education, lacking health insurance, or living in rural areas.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the effectiveness of 2 follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to improve CRC screening: automated telephone call or personal call. Patients aged 50 to 75 years residing in 4 rural community clinics in Louisiana were given a structured interview that assessed demographic, health literacy and CRC screening barriers, knowledge, and attitudes. All were given health literacy-informed CRC education, a patient-friendly CRC screening pamphlet, simplified fecal immunochemical test (FIT) instructions, and a FIT kit, and a "teach-back" method was used to confirm understanding. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 telephone follow-up arms. If they did not mail their FIT kit within 4 weeks, they received a reminder call and were called again at 8 weeks if the test still was not received.

RESULTS

A total of 620 patients were enrolled. Approximately 55% were female, 66% were African American, and 40% had limited literacy. The overall FIT completion rate was 68%: 69.2% in the automated telephone call arm and 67% in the personal call arm. Greater than one-half of the patients (range, 58%-60%) returned the FIT kit without receiving a telephone call. There was no difference noted with regard to the effectiveness of the follow-up calls; each increased the return rate by 9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing FIT kits and literacy-appropriate education at regularly scheduled clinic visits with a follow-up telephone call when needed was found to increase CRC screening among low-income, rural patients. The lower cost automated call was just as effective as the personal call.

Effectiveness of a brief phone intervention to increase participation in a population-based colorectal cancer screening programme: a randomized controlled trial

AIM

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces mortality and morbidity the uptake in target populations is suboptimal. The aim was to assess whether adding a brief phone intervention to the usual invitation process increases participation in a CRC screening programme based in Catalonia.

METHOD

This was a non-blinded prospective randomized control study of patients eligible for their first CRC screening test (immunochemical faecal occult blood test). Between March and December 2017, 512 invitees (age range 50-69 years) were randomized to receiving either a brief informative phone call prior to receiving the standard screening invitation (letter and informative brochure) or the standard screening invitation alone. The primary outcome was participation in the screening programme at 6 months.

RESULTS

In all, 492/512 patients (54.7% women; 45.3% men) could be analysed (239/256 intervention group; 253/256 control group). On an intention to treat basis, the intervention group (55% women; 45% men) saw an 11% increase in the participation rate (51.05% vs 40.32%, P = 0.017). The intervention was more effective in male patients (50.93% vs 33.91%, P = 0.01) and those patients aged between 50 and 54 years (54.32% vs 37.77%, P = 0.03). After adjusting for sex, age and geographic area, the benefit of the intervention remained statistically significant (adjusted OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.07-2.20).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that a brief, informative intervention by phone in addition to the usual invitation process is effective in increasing participation in a CRC screening programme. It may be a useful strategy to improve uptake in groups which are less likely to participate in CRC screening (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03082911).

Repeat Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Community Clinics: A Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate Outreach Strategies to Sustain Screening

PURPOSE

The majority of colorectal cancer (CRC) research using the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has studied short-term screening results in predominantly urban areas. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 outreach strategies embedded in a health literacy intervention on repeat CRC screening in rural community clinics.

METHODS

A 2-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted in 4 rural clinics in Louisiana. During a regularly scheduled clinic visit, participants ages 50-75 received a FIT kit and brief educational intervention. Participants were randomized to receive an automated call or a personal call by a prevention counselor after 4 weeks and 8 weeks if FIT kits were not returned. In year 2, materials were mailed, and follow-up calls were conducted as in year 1. The primary outcome was repeat FIT-the return of the FIT kit in both years.

PARTICIPANTS

Of 568 eligible participants, 55% were female, 67% were African American, and 39% had low health literacy.

FINDINGS

Repeat FIT rates were 36.5% for those receiving the automated call and 33.6% for those receiving a personal call (P = .30). No annual FITs were returned in 30% of participants, while only 1 FIT was returned by 35% of participants (31% only year 1 and 4% only year 2).

CONCLUSION

Sustaining CRC screening with FIT is challenging in rural clinics. A lower cost automated call was just as effective as the personal call in promoting repeat annual screening. However, more intensive strategies are needed to improve long-term FIT screening among rural participants.

Interventions to improve adherence to surveillance guidelines in survivors of childhood cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Many survivors of childhood cancer are at high risk of late effects of their cancer therapy, including cardiac toxicity and subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMN). Current North American guidelines recommend periodic surveillance for these late effects. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to estimate rates of adherence to recommended surveillance and summarize studies evaluating interventions intended to increase adherence.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for articles published between January 2000 and September 2018 that reported adherence to surveillance for cardiac toxicity and SMN (breast and colorectal cancer) and interventions implemented to improve completion of recommended testing. Risk of bias was assessed using relevant Cochrane checklists. Due to heterogeneity and overlapping study populations, we used narrative synthesis to summarize the findings. This review was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42018098878.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met our inclusion criteria for assessing adherence to surveillance, while five assessed interventions to improve rates of surveillance. No studies met criteria for low risk of bias. Completion of recommended surveillance was lowest for colorectal cancer screening (11.5-30.0%) followed by cardiomyopathy (22.3-48.1%) and breast cancer (37.0-56.5%). Factors such as patient-provider communication, engagement with the health care system, and receipt of information were consistently reported to be associated with higher rates of surveillance. Of five randomized controlled trials aimed at improving surveillance, only two significantly increase completion of recommended testing-one for echocardiography and one for mammography. Both involved telephone outreach to encourage and facilitate these tests.

CONCLUSION

The majority of childhood cancer survivors at high risk of cardiac toxicity or SMN do not receive evidence-based surveillance. There is paucity of rigorous studies evaluating interventions to increase surveillance in this population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Robust trials are needed to assess whether tailored interventions, designed based on unique characteristics and needs of each survivor population, could improve adherence.

A 4-year randomized trial comparing three outreach interventions to promote screening mammograms

As population health has become a focus of health care payers and providers, interest has grown in mail, phone, and other forms of outreach for improving population rates of cancer screening. Translational research is needed to compare the effectiveness and cost of low- and high-intensity behavioral outreach interventions for promoting cancer screening. The purpose of the article is to compare the effectiveness in promoting biannual mammograms of three interventions delivered over 4 years to a primary care population with a high baseline mammography adherence of 83.3%. We randomized women aged 40-84 to reminder letter only (LO arm), letter + reminder call (RC arm), and two letters + counseling call (CC arm) involving tailored education and motivational interviewing. Mammography adherence (≥1 mammogram in the previous 24 months) at four time points was determined from insurance claims records. Over 4 years, 30,162 women were randomized. At the end of 4 years, adherence was highest in the RC arm (83.0%) compared with CC (80.8%) and LO (80.8%) arms (p = .03). Only 23.5% of women in the CC arm were reached and accepted full counseling. The incremental cost per additional mammogram for RC arm women was $30.45 over the LO arm cost. A simple reminder call can increase screening mammogram adherence even when baseline adherence is high. Some more complex behavioral interventions delivered by mail and phone as in this study may be less effective, due to limited participation of patients, a focus on ambivalence, lack of follow-up, and other factors.

Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) is recommended by all major US medical organizations but remains underused.

OBJECTIVE

To identify interventions associated with increasing CRC screening rates and their effect sizes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1, 1996, to August 31, 2017. Key search terms included colorectal cancer and screening.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of US-based interventions in clinical settings designed to improve CRC screening test completion in average-risk adults.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

At least 2 investigators independently extracted data and appraised each study's risk of bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain either a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) for screening completion for each type of intervention.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was completion of CRC screening. Examination included interventions to increase completion of (1) initial CRC screening by any recommended modality, (2) colonoscopy after an abnormal initial screening test result, and (3) continued rounds of annual fecal blood tests (FBTs).

RESULTS

The main review included 73 randomized clinical trials comprising 366 766 patients at low or medium risk of bias. Interventions that were associated with increased CRC screening completion rates compared with usual care included FBT outreach (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.81-2.81; RD, 22%; 95% CI, 17%-27%), patient navigation (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.46; RD, 18%; 95% CI, 13%-23%), patient education (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; RD, 4%; 95% CI, 1%-6%), patient reminders (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; RD, 3%; 95% CI, 0%-5%), clinician interventions of academic detailing (RD, 10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%), and clinician reminders (RD, 13%; 95% CI, 8%-19%). Combinations of interventions (clinician interventions or navigation added to FBT outreach) were associated with greater increases than single components (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; RD, 7%; 95% CI, 3%-11%). Repeated mailed FBTs with navigation were associated with increased annual FBT completion (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.91-2.29; RD, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-49%). Patient navigation was not associated with colonoscopy completion after an initial abnormal screening test result (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.60; RD, 14%; 95% CI, 0%-29%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Fecal blood test outreach and patient navigation, particularly in the context of multicomponent interventions, were associated with increased CRC screening rates in US trials. Fecal blood test outreach should be incorporated into population-based screening programs. More research is needed on interventions to increase adherence to continued FBTs, follow-up of abnormal initial screening test results, and cost-effectiveness and other implementation barriers for more intensive interventions, such as navigation.

Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals are important contributors to healthcare quality and patient safety, but their performance does not always follow recommended clinical practice. There are many approaches to influencing practice among healthcare professionals. These approaches include audit and feedback, reminders, educational materials, educational outreach visits, educational meetings or conferences, use of local opinion leaders, financial incentives, and organisational interventions. In this review, we evaluated the effectiveness of patient-mediated interventions. These interventions are aimed at changing the performance of healthcare professionals through interactions with patients, or through information provided by or to patients. Examples of patient-mediated interventions include 1) patient-reported health information, 2) patient information, 3) patient education, 4) patient feedback about clinical practice, 5) patient decision aids, 6) patients, or patient representatives, being members of a committee or board, and 7) patient-led training or education of healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of patient-mediated interventions on healthcare professionals' performance (adherence to clinical practice guidelines or recommendations for clinical practice).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Ovid in March 2018, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in March 2017, and ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTRP) in September 2017, and OpenGrey, the Grey Literature Report and Google Scholar in October 2017. We also screened the reference lists of included studies and conducted cited reference searches for all included studies in October 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised studies comparing patient-mediated interventions to either usual care or other interventions to improve professional practice.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and the random-effects model. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) using inverse variance statistics. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies with a total of 12,268 patients. The number of healthcare professionals included in the studies ranged from 12 to 167 where this was reported. The included studies evaluated four types of patient-mediated interventions: 1) patient-reported health information interventions (for instance information obtained from patients about patients' own health, concerns or needs before a clinical encounter), 2) patient information interventions (for instance, where patients are informed about, or reminded to attend recommended care), 3) patient education interventions (intended to increase patients' knowledge about their condition and options of care, for instance), and 4) patient decision aids (where the patient is provided with information about treatment options including risks and benefits). For each type of patient-mediated intervention a separate meta-analysis was produced.Patient-reported health information interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 26 (95% CI 23 to 30) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 17 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). We are uncertain about the effect of patient-reported health information interventions on desirable patient health outcomes and patient satisfaction (very low-certainty evidence). Undesirable patient health outcomes and adverse events were not reported in the included studies and resource use was poorly reported.Patient information interventions may improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 32 (95% CI 24 to 42) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 20 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). Patient information interventions may have little or no effect on desirable patient health outcomes and patient satisfaction (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of patient information interventions on undesirable patient health outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.Patient education interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 46 (95% CI 39 to 54) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 35 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). Patient education interventions may slightly increase the number of patients with desirable health outcomes (low-certainty evidence). Undesirable patient health outcomes, patient satisfaction, adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.Patient decision aid interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 32 (95% CI 24 to 43) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 37 per 100 in the comparison group (usual care). Patient health outcomes, patient satisfaction, adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that two types of patient-mediated interventions, patient-reported health information and patient education, probably improve professional practice by increasing healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We consider the effect to be small to moderate. Other patient-mediated interventions, such as patient information may also improve professional practice (low-certainty evidence). Patient decision aids may make little or no difference to the number of healthcare professionals' adhering to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence).The impact of these interventions on patient health and satisfaction, adverse events and resource use, is more uncertain mostly due to very low certainty evidence or lack of evidence.

Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Primary Care Setting in Turkey

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common form of cancer in men worldwide and the second most common in women. The purpose of this study was to determine both barriers established by primary health care providers (PHCPs) and barriers perceived by them and to produce solutions for achieving the desired results. A four-part questionnaire was administered to family physicians (FPs) and family health personnels (FHPs) in Samsun, Turkey on 01-15 May, 2016. Sixty-six percent of PHCPs were contacted. Data were evaluated as numbers and percentages, and statistical significance was analyzed using the Chi square and t tests. 478 PHCPs participated; 49.4 % were FPs and 50.6 % FHPs. Of the participants, 86.6 % stated that they performed CRC screening on patients. The level of participants knowing that screening should start at age 50 and conclude at age 70 was 49.7 %. The level of subjects requesting the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) at the correct intervals was 29.7 %, but only 6.9 % recommended colonoscopy at the correct intervals. Additionally, 18.2 % of subjects knew that the test used is immunochemical FOBT, and 60.5 % reported not using reminders. PHCPs' low levels of knowledge, awareness and advice compatible with guidelines concerning CRC screening may represent an obstacle to such screening. Barriers perceived by PHCPs include patients' inability to access definite medical information, deficiencies in the reminder system and patients' lack of interest in CRC screening. Additions to the screening program will be useful in overcoming barriers.

Signed family physician reminder letters to women overdue for screening mammography: A randomized clinical trial

Objective

To determine whether signed family physician reminder letters to women overdue for screening mammography prompts rescreening.

Methods

A randomized double-blind trial conducted in 2013 among women aged 51–73 and overdue for screening by 6–24 months. The study was carried out by the publicly funded British Columbia Cancer Agency Screening Mammography Program, which routinely sends standard reminder postcards to women who are due for mammography. Participating family physicians signed letters for the overdue women in their practices. The overdue women were mailed either the signed reminder letter and the standard reminder postcard, or the standard reminder postcard alone. The primary endpoint was the proportion of overdue women that attended a screening mammogram appointment within six months of mailing the study letters. The analysis was by intention to treat.

Results

In total, 822 family physicians participated and 5638 women were randomized. Mammography attendance by six months after mailing the reminders was 34.4% (947/2749) for women in the signed family physician letter arm, compared with 24.0% (660/2749) for women in the control arm (p < 0.0001). Adjusting for age, number of previous screening mammograms, and months overdue, women in the signed letter arm were significantly more likely to return for screening than women in the control arm (RR 1.41; 95% confidence interval: 1.30–1.54).

Conclusion

A signed family physician reminder letter improved mammography attendance for women who were overdue for screening mammography.

Lay health educators within primary care practices to improve cancer screening uptake for South Asian patients: challenges in quality improvement

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening uptake is known to be low among South Asian residents of Ontario. The objective of this pilot study was to determine if lay health educators embedded within the practices of primary care providers could improve willingness to screen and cancer screening uptake for South Asian patients taking a quality improvement approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participating physicians selected quality improvement initiatives to use within their offices that they felt could increase willingness to screen and cancer screening uptake. They implemented initiatives, adapting as necessary, for six months.

RESULTS

Four primary care physicians participated in the study. All approximated that at least 60% of their patients were of South Asian ethnicity. All physicians chose to work with a preexisting lay health educator program geared toward South Asians. Health ambassadors spoke to patients in the office and telephoned patients. For all physicians, ~60% of South Asian patients who were overdue for cancer screening and who spoke directly to health ambassadors stated they were willing to be screened. One physician was able to track actual screening among contacted patients and found that screening uptake was relatively high: from 29.2% (colorectal cancer) to 44.6% (breast cancer) of patients came in for screening within six months of the first phone calls. Although physicians viewed the health ambassadors positively, they found the study to be time intensive and resource intensive, especially as this work was additional to usual clinical duties.

DISCUSSION

Using South Asian lay health educators embedded within primary care practices to telephone patients in their own languages showed promise in this study to increase awareness about willingness to screen and cancer screening uptake, but it was also time intensive and resource intensive with numerous challenges. Future quality improvement efforts should further develop the phone call invitation process, as well as explore how to provide infrastructure for lay health educator training and time.

Motivational interviewing to improve health screening uptake: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Health screenings, physical tests that diagnose disease, are underutilized. Motivational interviewing (MI) may increase health screening rates. This paper systematically reviewed the published articles that examined the efficacy of MI for improving health screening uptake.

METHODS

Articles published before April 28, 2015 were reviewed from PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Study methodology, participant demographics, outcomes and quality were extracted from each article.

RESULTS

Of the 1573 abstracts, 13 met inclusion criteria. Of the 13 studies, 6 found MI more efficacious than a control, 2 found MI more efficacious than a weak control yet equivalent to an active control, and 3 found MI was not significantly better than a control. Two single arm studies reported improvements in health screening rates following an MI intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

MI shows promise for improving health screening uptake. However, given the mixed results, the variability amongst the studies and the limited number of randomized trials, it is difficult to discern the exact impact of MI on health screening uptake.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future research is needed to better understand the impact of MI in this context. Such research would determine whether MI should be integrated into standard clinical practice for improving health screening uptake.

Cancer Screening Reminders: Addressing the Spectrum of Patient Preferences

CONTEXT

Health care systems continue to seek evidence about how to optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of cancer screening reminders. Annual reminders to receive preventive services can be an efficient strategy.

OBJECTIVE

To understand patient motivators and barriers to cancer screening and preferences about reminder strategies.

DESIGN

We conducted 11 focus groups among adults recommended for cancer screening within Kaiser Permanente Washington. We held separate focus groups with women aged 21 to 49 years, women 50 to 75 years, and men 50 to 75 years. We used an inductive, validated coding scheme for analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Motivators and barriers to obtaining recommended cancer screening and general cancer screening reminder content and modality preferences.

RESULTS

Half of our participants were women aged 50 to 75 years, and 25% were men aged 50 to 75 years. Differences by age, sex, insurance status, financial status, and health beliefs all drove the participants' preferences for whether they seek these recommended services and how and when they wish to be reminded about recommended cancer screening. Most participants preferred personalized reminders, and many favored receiving reminders less than 3 months before the recommended procedure date rather than a consolidated annual reminder. Younger participants more commonly requested electronic reminders, such as texts and e-mails.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing cancer screening reminders within a health care system involves a multifaceted approach that enables members to request which form of reminder they prefer (eg, electronic, paper, telephone) and the timing with which they want to be reminded, while staying affordable and manageable to the health care system.

Automated telephone communication systems for preventive healthcare and management of long-term conditions

BACKGROUND

Automated telephone communication systems (ATCS) can deliver voice messages and collect health-related information from patients using either their telephone's touch-tone keypad or voice recognition software. ATCS can supplement or replace telephone contact between health professionals and patients. There are four different types of ATCS: unidirectional (one-way, non-interactive voice communication), interactive voice response (IVR) systems, ATCS with additional functions such as access to an expert to request advice (ATCS Plus) and multimodal ATCS, where the calls are delivered as part of a multicomponent intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ATCS for preventing disease and managing long-term conditions on behavioural change, clinical, process, cognitive, patient-centred and adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 10 electronic databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Global Health; WHOLIS; LILACS; Web of Science; and ASSIA); three grey literature sources (Dissertation Abstracts, Index to Theses, Australasian Digital Theses); and two trial registries (www.controlled-trials.com; www.clinicaltrials.gov) for papers published between 1980 and June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, cluster- and quasi-randomised trials, interrupted time series and controlled before-and-after studies comparing ATCS interventions, with any control or another ATCS type were eligible for inclusion. Studies in all settings, for all consumers/carers, in any preventive healthcare or long term condition management role were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods to select and extract data and to appraise eligible studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 132 trials (N = 4,669,689). Studies spanned across several clinical areas, assessing many comparisons based on evaluation of different ATCS types and variable comparison groups. Forty-one studies evaluated ATCS for delivering preventive healthcare, 84 for managing long-term conditions, and seven studies for appointment reminders. We downgraded our certainty in the evidence primarily because of the risk of bias for many outcomes. We judged the risk of bias arising from allocation processes to be low for just over half the studies and unclear for the remainder. We considered most studies to be at unclear risk of performance or detection bias due to blinding, while only 16% of studies were at low risk. We generally judged the risk of bias due to missing data and selective outcome reporting to be unclear.For preventive healthcare, ATCS (ATCS Plus, IVR, unidirectional) probably increase immunisation uptake in children (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18 to 1.32; 5 studies, N = 10,454; moderate certainty) and to a lesser extent in adolescents (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; 2 studies, N = 5725; moderate certainty). The effects of ATCS in adults are unclear (RR 2.18, 95% CI 0.53 to 9.02; 2 studies, N = 1743; very low certainty).For screening, multimodal ATCS increase uptake of screening for breast cancer (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.55 to 3.04; 2 studies, N = 462; high certainty) and colorectal cancer (CRC) (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.88 to 2.55; 3 studies, N = 1013; high certainty) versus usual care. It may also increase osteoporosis screening. ATCS Plus interventions probably slightly increase cervical cancer screening (moderate certainty), but effects on osteoporosis screening are uncertain. IVR systems probably increase CRC screening at 6 months (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.48; 2 studies, N = 16,915; moderate certainty) but not at 9 to 12 months, with probably little or no effect of IVR (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99, 1.11; 2 studies, 2599 participants; moderate certainty) or unidirectional ATCS on breast cancer screening.Appointment reminders delivered through IVR or unidirectional ATCS may improve attendance rates compared with no calls (low certainty). For long-term management, medication or laboratory test adherence provided the most general evidence across conditions (25 studies, data not combined). Multimodal ATCS versus usual care showed conflicting effects (positive and uncertain) on medication adherence. ATCS Plus probably slightly (versus control; moderate certainty) or probably (versus usual care; moderate certainty) improves medication adherence but may have little effect on adherence to tests (versus control). IVR probably slightly improves medication adherence versus control (moderate certainty). Compared with usual care, IVR probably improves test adherence and slightly increases medication adherence up to six months but has little or no effect at longer time points (moderate certainty). Unidirectional ATCS, compared with control, may have little effect or slightly improve medication adherence (low certainty). The evidence suggested little or no consistent effect of any ATCS type on clinical outcomes (blood pressure control, blood lipids, asthma control, therapeutic coverage) related to adherence, but only a small number of studies contributed clinical outcome data.The above results focus on areas with the most general findings across conditions. In condition-specific areas, the effects of ATCS varied, including by the type of ATCS intervention in use.Multimodal ATCS probably decrease both cancer pain and chronic pain as well as depression (moderate certainty), but other ATCS types were less effective. Depending on the type of intervention, ATCS may have small effects on outcomes for physical activity, weight management, alcohol consumption, and diabetes mellitus. ATCS have little or no effect on outcomes related to heart failure, hypertension, mental health or smoking cessation, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects for preventing alcohol/substance misuse or managing illicit drug addiction, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HIV/AIDS, hypercholesterolaemia, obstructive sleep apnoea, spinal cord dysfunction or psychological stress in carers.Only four trials (3%) reported adverse events, and it was unclear whether these were related to the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ATCS interventions can change patients' health behaviours, improve clinical outcomes and increase healthcare uptake with positive effects in several important areas including immunisation, screening, appointment attendance, and adherence to medications or tests. The decision to integrate ATCS interventions in routine healthcare delivery should reflect variations in the certainty of the evidence available and the size of effects across different conditions, together with the varied nature of ATCS interventions assessed. Future research should investigate both the content of ATCS interventions and the mode of delivery; users' experiences, particularly with regard to acceptability; and clarify which ATCS types are most effective and cost-effective.

The role of a nurse telephone call to prevent no-shows in endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Preventing missed appointments, or "no-shows," is an important target in improving efficient patient care and lowering costs in gastrointestinal endoscopy practices. We aimed to investigate whether a nurse telephone call would reduce no-show rates for endoscopic appointments, and to determine if hiring and maintaining a nurse dedicated to pre-endoscopy phone calls is economically advantageous. Our secondary aim was to identify predictors of no-shows to endoscopy appointments.

METHODS

We hired and trained a full-time licensed nurse to make a telephone call to patients 7 days before their scheduled upper endoscopy or colonoscopy. We compared this intervention with a previous reminder system involving mailed reminders. The effect of the intervention and impact of other predictors of no-shows were analyzed in 2 similar preintervention and postintervention patient cohorts. A mixed effects logistic regression model was used to estimate the association of the odds of being a no-show to the scheduled appointment and the characteristics of the patient and visit. An analysis of costs was performed that included the startup and maintenance costs of the intervention.

RESULTS

We found that a nurse phone call was associated with a 33% reduction in the odds of a no-show visit (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.91), adjusting for gender, age, partnered status, insurer type, distance from the endoscopy center, and visit type. The recovered reimbursement during the study period was $48,765, with net savings of $16,190 when accounting for the maintenance costs of the intervention; this resulted in a net revenue per annum of $43,173.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that endoscopy practices may increase revenue, improve scheduling efficiency, and maximize resource utilization by hiring a nurse to reduce no-shows. Predictors of no-shows to endoscopy included unpartnered or single patients, commercial or managed care, being scheduled for colonoscopy as opposed to upper endoscopy, and being scheduled for a screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

Harnessing the Question-Behavior Effect to Enhance Colorectal Cancer Screening in an mHealth Experiment

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether asking questions about a future behavior changes this behavior (i.e., the question-behavior effect) when applied to a population-level intervention to enhance colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

In 2013, text-message reminders were sent to a national sample of 50 000 Israeli women and men aged 50 to 74 years following a fecal occult blood test invitation. Participants were randomized into 4 intervention groups (2 interrogative reminders, with or without reference to social context; 2 noninterrogative reminders, with or without social context) and a no-intervention control group. The outcome was fecal occult blood test uptake (n = 48 091, following attrition).

RESULTS

Performance of fecal occult blood test was higher in the interrogative-reminder groups than in the other 3 groups (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 1.05, 1.19); the effect size was small, varying in the different group comparisons from 0.03 to 0.06.

CONCLUSIONS

The question-behavior effect appears to be modestly effective in colorectal cancer screening, but the absolute number of potential screenees may translate into a clinically significant health promotion change.

Joint breast and colorectal cancer screenings in medically underserved women

BACKGROUND

Breast and colon cancer screening in rural community clinics is underused.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions designed to promote simultaneous screening for breast and colon cancer in community clinics.

METHODS

A 3-arm, quasi-experimental evaluation was conducted during May 2008-August 2011 in 8 federally qualified health clinics in predominately rural Louisiana. Baseline screening rates reported by the clinics was <10% for breast cancer (using mammography) and 1%-2% for colon cancer (using the fecal occult blood test [FOBT]). 744 women aged 50 years or older who were eligible for routine mammography and an FOBT were recruited. The combined screening efforts included: enhanced care; health literacy-informed education (education alone), or health literacy-informed education with nurse support (nurse support).

RESULTS

Postintervention screening rates for completing both tests were 28.1% with enhanced care, 23.7% with education alone, and 38.7% with nurse support. After adjusting for age, race, and literacy, patients who received nurse support were 2.21 times more likely to complete both screenings than were those who received the education alone (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-4.38; P = .023). The incremental cost per additional woman completing both screenings was $3,987 for education with nurse support over education alone, and $5,987 over enhanced care.

LIMITATIONS

There were differences between the 3 arms in sociodemographic characteristics, literacy, and previous screening history. Not all variables that were significantly different between arms were adjusted for, therefore adjustments for key variables (age, race, literacy) were made in statistical analyses. Other limitations related generalizability of results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although joint breast and colon cancer screening rates were increased substantially over existing baseline rates in all 3 arms, the completion rate for both tests was modest. Nurse support and telephone follow-up were most effective. However, it is not likely to be cost effective or affordable in clinics with limited resources.

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".

Ethical oversight in quality improvement and quality improvement research: new approaches to promote a learning health care system

BACKGROUND

Institutional review boards (IRBs) distinguish health care quality improvement (QI) and health care quality improvement research (QIR) based primarily on the rigor of the methods used and the purported generalizability of the knowledge gained. Neither of these criteria holds up upon scrutiny. Rather, this apparently false dichotomy may foster under-protection of participants in QI projects and over-protection of participants within QIR.

DISCUSSION

Minimal risk projects should entail minimal oversight including waivers for informed consent for both QI and QIR projects. Minimizing the burdens of conducting QIR, while ensuring minimal safeguards for QI projects, is needed to restore this imbalance in oversight. Potentially, such ethical oversight could be provided by the integration of Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Ethical Committees, using a more integrated and streamlined approach such as a two-step process involving a screening review, followed by a review by committee trained in QIR. Standards for such ethical review and training in these standards, coupled with rapid review cycles, could facilitate an appropriate level of oversight within the context of creating and sustaining learning health care systems. We argue that QI and QIR are not reliably distinguishable. We advocate for approaches that improve protections for QI participants while minimizing over-protection for participants in QIR through reasonable ethical oversight that aligns risk to participants in both QI and QIR with the needs of a learning health care system.

E-mail to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening Within Social Networks: Acceptability and Content

Effective techniques to encourage colorectal cancer screening in underscreened populations have included social support interventions and e-mail reminders from physicians. Personalized e-mail messages to promote colorectal cancer screening within social networks could be even more effective but have not been studied. The authors interviewed 387 e-mail users, aged 42-73 years in Georgia, Hawaii, and Massachusetts. Participants were asked to edit a sample message in which the sender shares a recent colonoscopy experience and urges the recipient to discuss colorectal cancer screening with a doctor. For those reporting willingness to send this message, changes to the message and suggested subject lines were recorded. Edited text was analyzed for content and concordance with original message. The majority of participants (74.4%) were willing to e-mail a modifiable message. Of those willing, 63.5% edited the message. Common edits included deletion (17.7%) or modification (17.4%) of a negatively framed sentence on colon cancer risks and addition or modification of personalizing words (15.6%). Few edits changed the meaning of the message (5.6%), and even fewer introduced factual inaccuracies (1.7%). Modifiable e-mail messages offer a way for screened individuals to promote colorectal cancer screening to social network members. The accuracy and effects of such messages should be further studied.

Public health and cooperative group partnership: a colorectal cancer intervention

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of a multi-component colorectal cancer educational tool for female breast cancer survivors through a cooperative group and public health partnership.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, World Wide Web, guidelines from professional organizations, surveys and focus groups with breast cancer survivors.

CONCLUSION

Collaboration is at the core of cooperative group and public health research. This partnership led to the development of a colorectal cancer educational tool for breast cancer survivors. Focus groups revealed that female breast cancer survivors were receptive to education on colorectal cancer screening.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses are instrumental in research collaborations between cooperative groups and public health. The colorectal educational intervention for breast cancer survivors serves as an exemplar of partnerships leading to innovative research planning and implementation outcomes.