The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients

Strategic use of resources to enhance colorectal cancer screening for patients with diabetes (SURE: CRC4D) in federally qualified health centers: a protocol for hybrid type ii effectiveness-implementation trial

BACKGROUND

Persons with diabetes have 27% elevated risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) and are disproportionately from priority health disparities populations. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) struggle to implement CRC screening programs for average risk patients. Strategies to effectively prioritize and optimize CRC screening for patients with diabetes in the primary care safety-net are needed.

METHODS

Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment Framework, we conducted a stakeholder-engaged process to identify multi-level change objectives for implementing optimized CRC screening for patients with diabetes in FQHCs. To identify change objectives, an implementation planning group of stakeholders from FQHCs, safety-net screening programs, and policy implementers were assembled and met over a 7-month period. Depth interviews (n = 18-20) with key implementation actors were conducted to identify and refine the materials, methods and strategies needed to support an implementation plan across different FQHC contexts. The planning group endorsed the following multi-component implementation strategies: identifying clinic champions, development/distribution of patient educational materials, developing and implementing quality monitoring systems, and convening clinical meetings. To support clinic champions during the initial implementation phase, two learning collaboratives and bi-weekly virtual facilitation will be provided. In single group, hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial, we will implement and evaluate these strategies in a in six safety net clinics (n = 30 patients with diabetes per site). The primary clinical outcomes are: (1) clinic-level colonoscopy uptake and (2) overall CRC screening rates for patients with diabetes assessed at baseline and 12-months post-implementation. Implementation outcomes include provider and staff fidelity to the implementation plan, patient acceptability, and feasibility will be assessed at baseline and 12-months post-implementation.

DISCUSSION

Study findings are poised to inform development of evidence-based implementation strategies to be tested for scalability and sustainability in a future hybrid 2 effectiveness-implementation clinical trial. The research protocol can be adapted as a model to investigate the development of targeted cancer prevention strategies in additional chronically ill priority populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05785780) on March 27, 2023 (last updated October 21, 2023).

Motivations and concerns of patients considering participation in an implementation study of a hereditary cancer risk assessment program in diverse primary care settings

PURPOSE

Understanding the motivations and concerns of patients from diverse populations regarding participation in implementation research provides the needed evidence about how to design and conduct studies for facilitating access to genetics services. Within a hereditary cancer screening study assessing a multifaceted intervention, we examined primary care patients' motivations and concerns about participation.

METHODS

We surveyed and interviewed study participants after they enrolled, surveyed those who did not complete enrollment, and used descriptive qualitative and quantitative methods to identify motivations and concerns regarding participation.

RESULTS

Survey respondents' most common motivations included a desire to learn about their future risk (81%), receiving information that may help family (58%), and a desire to advance research (34%). Interviews revealed 3 additional important factors: affordability of testing, convenience of participation, and clinical relationships supporting research decision-making. Survey data of those who declined enrollment showed that the reasons for declining included concerns about privacy (38%), burdens of the research (19%), and their fear of not being able to cope with the genetic information (19%).

CONCLUSION

Understanding the facilitating factors and concerns that contribute to decisions about research may reveal ways to improve equity in access to care and research that could lead to greater uptake of genomic medicine across diverse primary care patient populations.

A Lung Cancer Screening Education Program Impacts both Referral Rates and Provider and Medical Assistant Knowledge at Two Federally Qualified Health Centers

BACKGROUND

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) serve minority and low-socioeconomic populations and provide care to high-risk smokers. These centers frequently experience barriers, including low provider and medical assistant (MA) knowledge around lung cancer screening (LCS). Subsequent low LCS referral rates by providers at FQHCs limit utilization of LCS in eligible, high-risk, underserved patients.

METHODS

Providers and MAs from two FQHCs participated in a LCS educational session. A pre-educational survey was administered at the start of the session and a post-educational survey at the end. The intervention included a presentation with education around non-small cell lung cancer, LCS, tobacco cessation, and shared-decision making. Both surveys were used to evaluate changes in provider and MA ability to determine eligible patients for LCS. The Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction was used to measure the impact.

RESULTS

A total of 29 providers and 28 MAs enrolled in the study from two FQHCs. There was an improvement, P < .009 and P < .015 respectively, in provider and MA confidence in identifying patients for LCS. Additionally, one year prior to the program, 9 low-dose computed tomography (LDCTs) were ordered at one of the FQHCs and 0 at the other. After the program, over 100 LDCTs were ordered at each FQHC.

CONCLUSIONS

A targeted LCS educational program improves provider and MAs' ability to identify eligible LCS patients and is associated with an increase in the number of patients referred to LDCT at FQHCs.

Focused Education Increases Hepatocellular Cancer Screening in Patients with Cirrhosis Regardless of Functional Health Literacy

BACKGROUND

Health education interventions are successful in modifying lifestyle. Functional health literacy (FHL) can determine patient adherence to clinic visits and procedures and may adversely impact the success of these interventions.

AIMS

We sought to evaluate the hypothesis that a health education intervention would improve compliance with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) screening and that poor FHL would reduce such compliance.

METHODS

We assessed FHL using a short version test of functional health literacy in adults (STOFHLA). Cirrhotic patients free of HCC were prospectively enrolled from clinics and provided an educational intervention consisting of focused physician-led discussion regarding cirrhosis and HCC, along with written material on these topics for the subject to review at home. Patients were subsequently followed for 6 months (prospective time period), and the same cohort's clinic/HCC screening behavior between 6 and 12 months prior to the educational intervention (retrospective time period) was compared.

RESULTS

In total, 104 cirrhotic patients (age 60.01 ± 8.58 years, 80% men, MELD 12.70 ± 5.76) were included. Of these, 89 (85.57%) of patients had educational level 12th grade and higher. There were 76% (n = 79) with adequate, while 24% (n = 25) had inadequate/marginal FHL on S-TOHFLA. The number of HCC-related imaging increased from 59 (56.7%) to 86 (82.6%, p < 0.0001) post-education in the prospective compared to prior time period which was similar regardless of FHL.

CONCLUSIONS

While the educational intervention was successful in improving compliance with HCC screenings, FHL status did not impact the power of this intervention. Hence, the combination of specific verbal information, along with targeted written material, improved compliance with clinic visits and liver imaging for HCC.

Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review

Nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces NSCLC mortality; however, a lack of diversity in LCS studies may limit the generalizability of the results to marginalized groups who face higher risk for and worse outcomes from NSCLC. Identifying sources of inequity in the LCS pipeline is essential to reduce disparities in NSCLC outcomes. The authors searched 3 major databases for studies published from January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020 that met the following criteria: 1) included screenees between ages 45 and 80 years who were current or former smokers, 2) written in English, 3) conducted in the United States, and 4) discussed socioeconomic and race-based LCS outcomes. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Of 3721 studies screened, 21 were eligible. Eligible studies were evaluated, and their findings were categorized into 3 themes related to LCS disparities faced by Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals: 1) eligibility; 2) utilization, perception, and utility; and 3) postscreening behavior and care. Disparities in LCS exist along racial and socioeconomic lines. There are several steps along the LCS pipeline in which Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals miss the potential benefits of LCS, resulting in increased mortality. This study identified potential sources of inequity that require further investigation. The authors recommend the implementation of prospective trials that evaluate eligibility criteria for underserved groups and the creation of interventions focused on improving utilization and follow-up care to decrease LCS disparities.

Identifying actionable strategies: using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-informed interviews to evaluate the implementation of a multilevel intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Many evidence-based interventions (EBIs) found to be effective in research studies often fail to translate into meaningful patient outcomes in practice. The purpose of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers that affect the implementation of three EBIs to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in an urban federally qualified health center (FQHC) and offer actionable recommendations to improve future implementation efforts.

METHODS

We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews guided by the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to describe diverse stakeholders' implementation experience. The interviews were conducted in the participant's clinic, audio-taped, and professionally transcribed for analysis.

RESULTS

We used the five CFIR domains and 39 constructs and subconstructs as a coding template to conduct a template analysis. Based on experiences with the implementation of three EBIs, stakeholders described barriers and facilitators related to the intervention characteristics, outer setting, and inner setting. Implementation barriers included (1) perceived burden and provider fatigue with EHR (Electronic Health Record) provider reminders, (2) unreliable and ineffectual EHR provider reminders, (3) challenges to providing health care services to diverse patient populations, (4) lack of awareness about CRC screening among patients, (5) absence of CRC screening goals, (6) poor communication on goals and performance, and (7) absence of printed materials for frontline implementers to educate patients. Implementation facilitators included (1) quarterly provider assessment and feedback reports provided real-time data to motivate change, (2) integration with workflow processes, (3) pressure from funding requirement to report quality measures, (4) peer pressure to achieve high performance, and (5) a culture of teamwork and patient-centered mentality.

CONCLUSIONS

The CFIR can be used to conduct a post-implementation formative evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators that influenced the implementation. Furthermore, the CFIR can provide a template to organize research data and synthesize findings. With its clear terminology and meta-theoretical framework, the CFIR has the potential to promote knowledge-building for implementation. By identifying the contextual determinants, we can then determine implementation strategies to facilitate adoption and move EBIs to daily practice.

Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review

Approximately one-third of adults in the United States (U.S.) have limited health literacy. Those with limited health literacy often have difficultly navigating the health care environment, including navigating care across the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment). Evidence-based interventions to assist adults with limited health literacy improve health outcomes; however, little is known about health literacy interventions in the context of cancer and their impact on cancer-specific health outcomes. The purpose of this review was to identify and characterize the literature on health literacy interventions across the cancer care continuum. Specifically, our aim was to review the strength of evidence, outcomes assessed, and intervention modalities within the existing literature reporting health literacy interventions in cancer. Our search yielded 1036 records (prevention/screening n = 174; diagnosis/treatment n = 862). Following deduplication and review for inclusion criteria, we analyzed 87 records of intervention studies reporting health literacy outcomes, including 45 pilot studies (prevention/screening n = 24; diagnosis/treatment n = 21) and 42 randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental trials (prevention/screening n = 31; diagnosis/treatment n = 11). This literature included 36 unique interventions (prevention/screening n = 28; diagnosis/treatment n = 8), mostly in the formative stages of intervention development, with few assessments of evidence-based interventions. These gaps in the literature necessitate further research in the development and implementation of evidence-based health literacy interventions to improve cancer outcomes.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake: Differences Between Rural and Urban Privately-Insured Population

Earlier studies investigated rural-urban colorectal cancer (CRC) screening disparities among older adults or used surveys. The objective was to compare screening uptake between rural and urban individuals 50–64 years of age using private health insurance. Data were analyzed from 58,774 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Nebraska beneficiaries. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between rural-urban and CRC screening use. Results indicate that rural individuals were 56% more likely to use the Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) compared with urban residents, but rural females were 68% less likely to use FOBT. Individuals with few Primary Care Physician (PCP) visits and rural-women are the least to receive screening. To enhance CRC screening, a policy should be devised for the training and placement of female PCP in rural areas. In particular, multilevel interventions, including education, more resources, and policies to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening, are needed. Further research is warranted to investigate barriers to CRC screening in rural areas.

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.

Effectiveness of a Comprehensive Health Literacy Consultation Skills Training for Undergraduate Medical Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comprehensible communication by itself is not sufficient to overcome health literacy related problems. Future doctors need a larger scope of capacities in order to strengthen a patient’s autonomy, participation, and self-management abilities. To date, such comprehensive training-interventions are rarely embedded in curricula, nor systematically evaluated. We assessed whether comprehensive training increased these health literacy competencies, in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), with a waiting list condition. Participants were international undergraduate medical students of a Dutch medical faculty (intervention: 39; control: 40). The 11-h-training-intervention encompassed a health literacy lecture and five interactive small-group sessions to practise gathering information and providing comprehensible information, shared decision-making, and enabling of self-management using role-play and videotaped conversations. We assessed self-reported competencies (knowledge and awareness of health literacy, attitude, self-efficacy, and ability to use patient-centred communication techniques) at baseline, after a five and ten-week follow-up. We compared students’ competencies using multi-level analysis, adjusted for baseline. As validation, we evaluated demonstrated skills in videotaped consultations for a subsample. The group of students who received the training intervention reported significantly greater health literacy competencies, which persisted up to five weeks afterwards. Increase was greatest for providing comprehensible information (B: 1.50; 95% confidence interval, CI 1.15 to 1.84), shared decision-making (B: 1.08; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.55), and self-management (B: 1.21; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.80). Effects regarding demonstrated skills confirmed self-rated competency improvement. This training enhanced a larger scope of health literacy competences and was well received by medical students. Implementation and further evaluation of this training in education and clinical practice can support sustainable health literacy capacity building of future doctors and contribute to better patient empowerment and outcomes of consultations.

Positive Outcomes of a Comprehensive Health Literacy Communication Training for Health Professionals in Three European Countries: A Multi-centre Pre-post Intervention Study

Many professionals have limited knowledge of how to address health literacy; they need a wider range of health literacy competencies to enhance empowerment and person-centred prevention. We evaluated whether: (1) a comprehensive health literacy training increased self-rated competencies of health professionals to address health literacy related problems and support the development of people's autonomy and self-management abilities after training and 6-12 weeks later, (2) professionals were satisfied with the training, (3) outcomes differed for the three participating European countries. Health professionals (N = 106) participated in a multicentre pre-post intervention study in Italy, the Netherlands and Northern Ireland. The 8-hour training-intervention involved health literacy knowledge, the practice of comprehensible communication skills, shared decision-making, and enhancing self-management. Self-rated health literacy competencies and training satisfaction were assessed at baseline, immediately after training and 6-12 weeks later, and analysed by multi-level analysis. Professionals' self-rated health literacy competencies significantly improved following training in all three countries; this increase persisted at 6-12 weeks follow-up. The strongest increase regarded professional's skills to enhance shared-decision making and enabling self-management after training and follow-up respectively. Professionals perceived the training as relevant for practice. Competency increases seemed to be consistent across countries. In three countries, professionals' self-rated health literacy competencies increased following this comprehensive training. These promising findings should be confirmed in a further full effect study. Implementation of this training in European education and health care may improve person-centred communication by professionals and might help to tackle health literacy related problems and to strengthen people's abilities in achieving better health outcomes.

Factors Influencing Adherence to Recommended Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: Experiences and Behaviors of Colorectal Cancer Survivors

The number of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors in the USA is increasing and factors associated with CRC surveillance require attention. This study examined the role of personal, provider, and practice-level factors on CRC survivor care surveillance experiences and outcomes. A telephone survey, informed by the Chronic Care Model, was conducted over a 1-year period with 150 CRC survivors identified via the South Carolina Central Cancer Registry. Participants were ages ≥ 21 years and diagnosed with stages I-III CRC within 1.5 years of study enrollment. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Adherence was defined as receipt of surveillance colonoscopy at 13 months post-CRC surgery, as recommended by evidence-based guidelines. The majority of participants were male (55%) and white (86%), with a median age of 65 years (range 25-89). Almost half (43%) had attained a high school degree or less. Cancer stage was fairly evenly distributed, and 58% had received treatment by surgery alone (provider-level factor). Few participants (56%) received a survivorship care plan (practice-level factor), and adherence to surveillance colonoscopy was lowest (36%) among participants with more than one comorbidity (personal-level factor). Logistic regression models showed that the only significant effect of personal, provider, or practice-level factors on CRC surveillance adherence was related to type of health insurance coverage (private/HMO vs. other; p = 0.04). This is one of the first studies to evaluate CRC surveillance in a socioeconomically diverse sample. The only associations found among the examined factors and adherence were related to type of health insurance coverage. Participants with private/HMO health insurance were significantly more likely than participants with "other" health insurance coverage types (i.e., none, Medicare without supplement, Medicare with supplement) to be adherent to the 13-month colonoscopy. Therefore, future education strategies and patient navigation interventions could focus on identifying and overcoming multi-level barriers to CRC surveillance services.

The impact of travel time on colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis in a privately insured population

BACKGROUND

Rural residents are less likely to receive screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) than urban residents. However, the mechanisms underlying this disparity, especially among people aged 50-64 years old with private health insurance, are not well understood. We examined the impact of travel time on stage at CRC diagnosis.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska. Members of this private insurance company aged 50-64 years, diagnosed with CRC during the period 2012-2016, and continuously enrolled in the insurance plan for at least 6 months prior to CRC diagnosis, were selected for this study. Using Google Maps, we estimated patients' travel time from their home ZIP code to the ZIP code of their colonoscopy provider. Using logistic regression, we analyzed the association between stage at CRC diagnosis, travel time, use of preventive services (i.e., check-ups or counseling to prevent or detect illness at an early stage) and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 307 subjects met the inclusion criteria. People who had not used preventive services 6 months prior to CRC diagnosis had 2.80 (95% CI, 1.00-7.90) times the odds of metastatic CRC compared to those who had used these services. No statistically significant association was found between travel time and metastatic CRC diagnosis (P = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The fact that 13% of the study population presented with metastatic CRC suggests some noncompliance with preventive services such as screening guidelines. To increase screening uptake and reduce metastatic cases, employers should offer incentives for their employees to make use of preventive services such as CRC screening.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Black Men: Recommendations for Best Practices

Screening for colorectal cancer has been demonstrated to reduce colorectal cancer mortality. Blacks have a higher mortality from this malignancy, particularly men, yet screening rates in this population are often found to be lower than in whites. A modest literature demonstrates effective interventions that can increase screening rates in blacks; however, results are not consistent and ongoing work is required. Most work has not addressed specific barriers to screening in black men. Given the lack of studies on black men only, this study evaluated the state of research in the black population using a PubMed search. The authors provide commentary that proposes increased (1) state and local government support for collaborative programs with healthcare organizations, including patient navigation; (2) augmented community-organizing efforts to generate more attention to the need for colorectal cancer screening in the black community, with a focus on black men; and (3) federal research funding to promote investigation into new interventions and evaluation of existing ones. Specific recommendations for black men include lowering the screening age to 45years, increasing access to health care, the use of patient navigators, and improved reporting and monitoring of colorectal cancer screening rates. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION: This article is part of a supplement entitled African American Men's Health: Research, Practice, and Policy Implications, which is sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction. Discussions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with older adults should be individualized to maximize appropriate screening. Our aim was to describe CRC screening discussions and explore their associations with patient characteristics and screening intentions. Methods. Cross-sectional survey of 422 primary care patients aged ≥70 years and eligible for CRC screening, including open-ended questions about CRC screening discussions. Primary outcomes were the frequency with which CRC screening discussions occurred, who had those discussions, and the domains that emerged from thematic analysis of participants' brief reports of their discussions. We also examined the associations between 1) patient characteristics and whether a screening discussion occurred and 2) the domains discussed and what screening decisions were made. Results. Of 422 participants, 209 reported having discussions and 201 responded to open-ended questions about CRC discussions. In a regression analysis, several factors were associated with increased odds of having a discussion: participants' preference to pursue screening (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3, 3.9), good health (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7, 4.8), and receipt of the decision aid (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4, 3.2). Our thematic analysis identified five domains related to discussion content and three related to discussion process. The CRC screening-related information domain was the most commonly discussed content domain, and the timing/frequency domain was associated with increased odds of intent to pursue screening. Decision-making role, the most commonly discussed process domain, was associated with increased odds of the intent to forgo CRC screening. Conclusions and Relevance. CRC screening discussions varied by type of participant and content. Future work is needed to determine if interventions focused on specific domains alters the appropriateness of participants' colorectal cancer screening intentions.

Developing and pilot testing a comprehensive health literacy communication training for health professionals in three European countries

OBJECTIVE

Skills to address different health literacy problems are lacking among health professionals. We sought to develop and pilot test a comprehensive health literacy communication training for various health professionals in Ireland, Italy and the Netherlands.

METHODS

Thirty health professionals participated in the study. A literature review focused on evidence-informed training-components. Focus group discussions (FGDs) explored perspectives from seventeen professionals on a prototype-program, and feedback from thirteen professionals following pilot-training. Pre-post questionnaires assessed self-rated health literacy communication skills.

RESULTS

The literature review yielded five training-components to address functional, interactive and critical health literacy: health literacy education, gathering and providing information, shared decision-making, enabling self-management, and supporting behaviour change. In FGDs, professionals endorsed the prototype-program and reported that the pilot-training increased knowledge and patient-centred communication skills in addressing health literacy, as shown by self-rated pre-post questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive training for health professionals in three European countries enhances perceived skills to address functional, interactive and critical health literacy.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This training has potential for wider application in education and practice in Europe.

Physician Intervention and Chinese Americans' Colorectal Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a cluster-randomized trial evaluating an intervention that trained Chinese-American primary care physicians to increase their Chinese patients' colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

Twenty-five physicians (13 randomized to the intervention arm and 12 to the control arm) and 479 of their patients (aged 50-75 and nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines) were enrolled. The intervention, guided by Social Cognitive Theory, included a communication guide and 2 in-office training sessions to enhance physicians' efficacy in com- municating CRC screening with patients. Patients' CRC screening rates (trial outcome) and rating of physician communication before intervention and at 12-month follow-up were assessed. Intention-to-treat analysis for outcome evaluation was conducted.

RESULTS

Screening rates were slightly higher in the intervention vs. the control arm (24.4% vs. 17.7%, p = .24). In post hoc analyses, intervention arm patients who perceived better communication were more likely to be screened than those who did not (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.15). This relationship was not seen in the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS

This physician-focused intervention had small, non-significant effects in increasing Chinese patients' CRC screening rates. Physician communication appeared to explain intervention efficacy. More intensive interventions are needed to enhance Chinese patients' CRC screening.

Using Intervention Mapping to Develop Health Education Components to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Puerto Rico

Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Puerto Rico (PR). Although largely preventable through screening and treatment of precancerous polyps, CRC screening rates in PR remain low while CRC incidence and mortality continue to increase.

Methods

We used intervention mapping (IM), a systematic framework using theory and evidence to plan a health promotion intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) among Puerto Rican adults 50 years and older who are patients of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in PR.

Results

To inform the development of a logic model of the problem during the needs assessment phase, we determined the CRC incidence and mortality rates in PR using recent data from the PR Cancer Registry, conducted a literature review to better understand behavioral and environmental factors influencing CRC among Hispanics in general and in Puerto Ricans, and collected new data. We conducted seven focus groups to identify community needs and resources, specific sub-behaviors related to CRCS (performance objectives) and the determinants of CRCS. We then developed matrices of change objectives that would guide the content, behavioral change method selection, and the practical applications that would be included in the program. We selected two overarching methods: entertainment education and behavioral journalism and developed practical applications, materials, and messages containing several other methods including modeling, persuasion, information, and tailoring. We developed and pretested a Tailored Interactive Multimedia Intervention, newsletter, an action plan, and supplemental print materials for patients. We also developed a patient mediated provider prompt to increase provider recommendation and improve patient provider communication.

Conclusion

The use of IM for systematic planning produced a detailed coherent plan for the CRCS educational intervention. Guided by IM processes, steps, and tasks, we used community level information, existing literature, theory, and new data to develop health education materials that were well received by the priority population and will likely increase CRCS among FQHC patients in PR.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Patients: Promoting Informed and Shared Decisions

INTRODUCTION

Low-income, low-literacy, limited English-proficient populations have low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and experience poor patient-provider communication and decision-making processes around screening. The purpose of this study was to test the effect of a CRC screening decision aid on screening-related communication and decision making in primary care visits.

STUDY DESIGN

RCT with data collected from patients at baseline and immediately after the provider encounter.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 50-75 years, due for CRC screening, were recruited from two safety net clinics in North Carolina and New Mexico (data collection, January 2014-September 2015; analysis, 2015).

INTERVENTION

Participants viewed a CRC screening decision aid or a food safety (control) video immediately before their provider encounter.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

CRC screening-related knowledge, discussion, intent, test preferences, and test ordering.

RESULTS

The study population (N=262) had a mean age of 58.3 years and was 66% female, 61% Latino, 17% non-Latino black, and 16% non-Latino white. Among Latino participants, 71% preferred Spanish. Compared with controls, intervention participants had greater screening-related knowledge (on average 4.6 vs 2.8 of six knowledge items correct, adjusted difference [AD]=1.8, 95% CI=1.5, 2.1) and were more likely to report screening discussion (71.0% vs 45.0%, AD=26.1%, 95% CI=14.3%, 38.0%) and high screening intent (93.1% vs 84.7%, AD=9.0%, 95% CI=2.0%, 16.0%). Intervention participants were more likely to indicate a specific screening test preference (93.1% vs 68.0%, AD=26.5%, 95% CI=17.2%, 35.8%) and to report having a test ordered (56.5% vs 32.1%, AD=25.8%, 95% CI=14.4%, 37.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Viewing a CRC screening decision aid before a primary care encounter improves knowledge and shared decision making around screening in a racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse safety net clinic population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02054598.

Tailored information increases patient/physician discussion of colon cancer risk and testing: The Cancer Risk Intake System trial

Assess whether receipt of tailored printouts generated by the Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) – a touch-screen computer program that collects data from patients and generates printouts for patients and physicians – results in more reported patient-provider discussions about colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and screening than receipt of non-tailored information.

Cluster-randomized trial, randomized by physician, with data collected via CRIS prior to visit and 2-week follow-up telephone survey among 623 patients.

Patients aged 25–75 with upcoming primary-care visits and eligible for, but currently non-adherent to CRC screening guidelines.

Patient-reported discussions with providers about CRC risk and testing.

Tailored recipients were more likely to report patient-physician discussions about personal and familial risk, stool testing, and colonoscopy (all p < 0.05). Tailored recipients were more likely to report discussions of: chances of getting cancer (+ 10%); family history (+ 15%); stool testing (+ 9%); and colonoscopy (+ 8%) (all p < 0.05).

CRIS is a promising strategy for facilitating discussions about testing in primary-care settings.

•

Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) intervention is a touch-screen computer program.

•

Patients use CRIS to input CRC risk factor data before primary care appointments.

•

CRIS generates tailored printouts with guideline-based screening recommendations.

•

Our randomized trial compared receipt of CRIS tailored v. non-tailored printouts.

•

CRIS tailored group reported more patient-MD discussion of CRC risk and testing.