1
|
Yeh PG, Choh AC, Fisher-Hoch SP, McCormick JB, Lairson DR, Reininger BM. The association of cancer-preventive lifestyle with colonoscopy screening use in border Hispanic adults along the Texas-Mexico border. Cancer Causes Control 2024:10.1007/s10552-024-01885-1. [PMID: 38743343 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-024-01885-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The relationship between engaging in two domains of cancer-preventive behaviors, lifestyle behaviors and colonoscopy screening, is unknown in Hispanic adults. Accordingly, the study examined the association between lifestyle and colonoscopy screening in Hispanic adults along the Texas-Mexico border, where there is suboptimal colorectal cancer prevention. METHODS Lifestyle behavior adherence and compliance with colonoscopy screening schedules were assessed using 2013-2023 data from the Cameron County Hispanic Cohorta population-based sample of Hispanic adults living along the Texas-Mexico border. The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund scoring system characterized healthy lifestyle engagement. Multivariable logistic regression quantified the association between lifestyle behaviors and colonoscopy screening. RESULTS Among 914 Hispanic adults, there was a mean adherence score of 2.5 out of 7 for recommended behaviors. Only 33.0% (95% CI 25.64-41.39%) were up-to-date with colonoscopy. Complete adherence to fruit and vegetable (AOR [adjusted odds ratio] 5.2, 95% CI 1.68-16.30; p = 0.004), fiber (AOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.06-4.37; p = 0.04), and ultra-processed foods (AOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.30-6.21; p = 0.01) consumption recommendations were associated with up-to-date colonoscopy screening. Having insurance versus being uninsured (AOR 10.8, 95% CI 3.83-30.62; p < 0.001) and having local medical care versus in Mexico (AOR 7.0, 95% CI 2.26-21.43; p < 0.001) were associated with up-to-date colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS Adherence to dietary lifestyle recommendations was associated with being up-to-date with colonoscopy screenings. Those with poor dietary behavior are at risk for low-colonoscopy use. Improving lifestyle behaviors may complement colonoscopy promotion interventions. Healthcare accessibility influences up-to-date colonoscopy prevalence. Our findings can inform cancer prevention strategies for the Hispanic population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Gerardo Yeh
- Department of Management, Policy, and Community Health, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler Street RAS E-311, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
| | - Audrey C Choh
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, Brownsville, TX, USA
| | - Susan P Fisher-Hoch
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, Brownsville, TX, USA
| | - Joseph B McCormick
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, Brownsville, TX, USA
| | - David R Lairson
- Department of Management, Policy, and Community Health, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler Street RAS E-311, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Belinda M Reininger
- Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, Brownsville, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bell-Brown A, Chew L, Weiner BJ, Strate L, Balmadrid B, Lewis CC, Hannon P, Inadomi JM, Ramsey SD, Issaka RB. Operationalizing a Rideshare Intervention for Colonoscopy Completion: Barriers, Facilitators, and Process Recommendations. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2022; 1:799816. [PMID: 35128543 PMCID: PMC8817893 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2021.799816] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Transportation is a common barrier to colonoscopy completion for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The study aims to identify the barriers, facilitators, and process recommendations to implement a rideshare non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) intervention following colonoscopy completion within a safety-net healthcare setting. METHODS We used informal stakeholder engagement, story boards - a novel user-centered design technique, listening sessions and the nominal group technique to identify the barriers, facilitators, and process to implementing a rideshare NEMT program following colonoscopy completion in a large safety-net healthcare system. RESULTS Barriers to implementing a rideshare NEMT intervention for colonoscopy completion included: inability to expand an existing NEMT program beyond Medicaid patients and lack of patient chaperones with rideshare NEMT programs. Facilitators included: commercially available rideshare NEMT platforms that were lower cost and had shorter wait times than the alternative of taxis. Operationalizing and implementing a rideshare NEMT intervention in our healthcare system required the following steps: 1) identifying key stakeholders, 2) engaging stakeholder groups in discussion to identify barriers and solutions, 3) obtaining institutional sign-off, 4) developing a process for reviewing and selecting a rideshare NEMT program, 5) executing contracts, 6) developing a standard operating procedure and 7) training clinic staff to use the rideshare platform. DISCUSSION Rideshare NEMT after procedural sedation is administered may improve colonoscopy completion rates and provide one solution to inadequate CRC screening. If successful, our rideshare model could be broadly applicable to other safety-net health systems, populations with high social needs, and settings where procedural sedation is administered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ari Bell-Brown
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Lisa Chew
- Department of Internal medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Bryan J Weiner
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Lisa Strate
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Bryan Balmadrid
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Cara C Lewis
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Peggy Hannon
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - John M Inadomi
- Department of Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Scott D Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States.,Department of Internal medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Rachel B Issaka
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States.,Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States.,Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blashill AJ, Gordon JR, Rojas SA, Ramers CB, Lin CD, Carrizosa CM, Nogg KA, Lamb KM, Lucido NC, Jones IJ, Rivera D, Cobian Aguilar RA, Brady JP, Fuentes M, Wells KJ. Pilot randomised controlled trial of a patient navigation intervention to enhance engagement in the PrEP continuum among young Latino MSM: a protocol paper. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e040955. [PMID: 34039570 PMCID: PMC8160175 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040955] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Men who have sex with men (MSM) are one of the most at-risk group for contracting HIV in the USA. However, the HIV epidemic impacts some groups of MSM disproportionately. Latino MSM comprise 25.1% of new HIV infections among MSM between the ages of 13 and 29 years. The daily medication tenofovir/emtricitabine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in 2012 and has demonstrated strong efficacy in reducing HIV acquisition. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Through extensive formative research, this study uses a pilot randomised controlled trial design and will examine the feasibility and acceptability of a patient navigation intervention designed to address multiple barriers to improve engagement in the PrEP continuum among 60 Latino MSM between the ages of 18 and 29 years. The patient navigation intervention will be compared with usual care plus written information to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and study methods and the intervention's potential in improving PrEP continuum behaviours. The results will be reviewed for preparation for a future full-scale efficacy trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study was approved by the institutional review board at San Diego State University and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The intervention development process, plan and the results of this study will be shared through peer-reviewed journal publications, conference presentations and healthcare system and community presentations. REGISTRATION DETAILS Registered under the National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04048382) on 7 August 2019 and approved by the San Diego State University (HS-2017-0187) institutional review board. This study began on 5 August 2019 and is estimated to continue through 31 March 2021. The clinical trial is in the pre-results stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaron J Blashill
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
- SDSU/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Janna R Gordon
- SDSU/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Sarah A Rojas
- Family Health Centers of San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Chii-Dean Lin
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Kelsey A Nogg
- San Diego State University Research Foundation, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Kalina M Lamb
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Nicholas C Lucido
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Isaiah J Jones
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | - David Rivera
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - John P Brady
- SDSU/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Martin Fuentes
- Family Health Centers of San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Kristen J Wells
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
- SDSU/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Attipoe-Dorcoo S, Chattopadhyay SK, Verughese J, Ekwueme DU, Sabatino SA, Peng Y. Engaging Community Health Workers to Increase Cancer Screening: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review. Am J Prev Med 2021; 60:e189-e197. [PMID: 33309455 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2020] [Revised: 08/05/2020] [Accepted: 08/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends engaging community health workers to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings on the basis of strong evidence of effectiveness. This systematic review examines the economic evidence of these interventions. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature search was performed with a search period through April 2019 to identify relevant economic evaluation studies. All monetary values were adjusted to 2018 U.S. dollars, and the analysis was completed in 2019. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 19 studies were included in the final analysis with 3 on breast cancer, 5 on cervical cancer, 9 on colorectal cancer, and 2 that combined costs for breast and cervical cancers and for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. For cervical cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year saved of $762 and $34,405. For colorectal cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported both a negative incremental cost and an increase in quality-adjusted life years saved with colonoscopy screening. CONCLUSIONS Engaging community health workers to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screenings is cost effective on the basis of estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were less than the conservative $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year threshold. In addition, quality-adjusted life years saved from colorectal screening with colonoscopy were associated with net healthcare cost savings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharon Attipoe-Dorcoo
- Community Guide Office, Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Sajal K Chattopadhyay
- Community Guide Office, Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
| | - Jacob Verughese
- Community Guide Office, Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Donatus U Ekwueme
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Susan A Sabatino
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Yinan Peng
- Community Guide Office, Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Annadurai V, Blackett JW, Freedberg D, Hur C, Green PH, Lebwohl B. Characteristics and Outcomes of Endoscopies before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic in New York. Dig Dis 2021; 39:663-672. [PMID: 33631758 PMCID: PMC8089412 DOI: 10.1159/000515431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 02/23/2021] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The COVID-19 pandemic drastically changed hospital workflows. This study aimed to characterize differences in gastrointestinal endoscopies in the New York metropolitan region before, during, and after the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS Across 3 hospitals, we compared demographics, indications, and yield of endoscopies before and after March 16, 2020, the date on which elective procedures were canceled, as well as a recovery period for 5 months after they were resumed. RESULTS A total of 9,401 procedures before and 332 procedures during the first wave were performed. Females comprised 57 and 44% of patients (p < 0.01), respectively. There was a decline in the proportion of Black (15 vs. 7%, p < 0.02) and Hispanic patients (29 vs. 16%, p < 0.02) undergoing outpatient procedures. There was a significant rise in urgent indications such as bleeding and jaundice. There was an increase in the diagnostic yield of all esophagogastroduodenoscopies for bleeding (p < 0.01) and of outpatient endoscopic ultrasounds for malignancy (p = 0.01), but no increase in yield of inpatient colonoscopy for bleeding. A review of 7,475 procedures during the recovery period showed a return to many nonurgent indications, but still showed decreased proportions of Hispanic and male patients compared to the prepandemic period. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION Lower proportions of Black and Hispanic patients underwent outpatient endoscopies during and after the first wave. The proportion of procedures done for emergent indications and their diagnostic yield increased during the pandemic, suggesting a higher threshold to perform endoscopy. In resource-sparing conditions, clinicians should pay attention to thresholds to perform colonoscopy for bleeding and to racial disparities in outpatient healthcare access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vasantham Annadurai
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - John W. Blackett
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Daniel Freedberg
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Chin Hur
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA,Division of General Medicine, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Peter H.R. Green
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Benjamin Lebwohl
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA,Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mohan G, Chattopadhyay S. Cost-effectiveness of Leveraging Social Determinants of Health to Improve Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. JAMA Oncol 2021; 6:1434-1444. [PMID: 32556187 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance Screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers in the United States has remained below the Healthy People 2020 goals, with evidence indicating that persistent screening disparities still exist. The US Department of Health and Human Services has emphasized cross-sectoral collaboration in aligning social determinants of health with public health and medical services. Examining the economics of intervening through these novel methods in the realm of cancer screening can inform program planners, health care providers, implementers, and policy makers. Objective To conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions leveraging social determinants of health to improve screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer to guide implementation. Evidence Review A systematic literature search for economic evidence was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Global Health, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, EconLit, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), and Sociological Abstracts from January 1, 2004, to November 25, 2019. Included studies intervened on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the United States and reported intervention cost, incremental cost per additional person screened, and/or incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Risk of bias was assessed along with qualitative assessment of quality to ensure complete reporting of economic measures, data sources, and analytic methods. In addition, included studies with modeled outcomes had to define structural elements and sources for input parameters, distinguish between programmatic and literature-derived data, and assess uncertainty. Findings Thirty unique articles with 94 706 real and 4.21 million simulated participants satisfied our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The median intervention cost per participant was $123.87 (interquartile interval [IQI], $24.44-$313.19; 34 estimates). The median incremental cost per additional person screened was $250.37 (IQI, $44.67-$609.38; 17 estimates). Studies that modeled final economic outcomes had a median incremental cost per person of $122.96 (IQI, $46.96-$124.80; 5 estimates), a median incremental screening rate of 15% (IQI, 14%-20%; 5 estimates), and a median incremental QALY per person of 0.04 years (IQI, 0.006-0.06 year; 5 estimates). The median incremental cost per QALY gained of $3120.00 (IQI, $782.59-$33 600.00; 5 estimates) was lower than $50 000, an established, conservative threshold of cost-effectiveness. Conclusions and Relevance Interventions focused on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening appear to be cost-effective for underserved, vulnerable populations in the United States. The increased screening rates were associated with earlier diagnosis and treatment and in improved health outcomes with significant gains in QALYs. These findings represent the latest economic evidence to guide implementation of these interventions, which serve the dual purpose of enhancing health equity and economic efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giridhar Mohan
- Office of the Director, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Sajal Chattopadhyay
- Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Vohra AS, Chua RFM, Besser SA, Alcain CF, Basnet S, Battle B, Coplan MJ, Liao JK, Tabit CE. Community Health Workers Reduce Rehospitalizations and Emergency Department Visits for Low-Socioeconomic Urban Patients With Heart Failure. Crit Pathw Cardiol 2020; 19:139-145. [PMID: 32209825 PMCID: PMC7679953 DOI: 10.1097/hpc.0000000000000220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low-socioeconomic, urban, minority patients with heart failure (HF) often have unique barriers to care. Community health workers (CHWs) are specially trained laypeople who serve as liaisons between underserved communities and the health system. It is not known whether CHWs improve outcomes in low-socioeconomic, urban, minority patients with HF. HYPOTHESIS CHWs reduce rehospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and healthcare costs for low-socioeconomic urban patients with HF. METHODS Patients admitted with acute decompensated HF were assigned to receive weekly visits by CHW after discharge. Patients were propensity score matched with controls who received usual care. HF-related rehospitalizations, ED visits, and inpatient costs were compared for 12 months following index admission versus the same period before. RESULTS Twenty-eight patients who received weekly visits from a CHW for 12 months after discharge were matched with 28 control patients who did not receive CHWs. Patients who received a CHW had a 75% decrease in HF-related ED visits (0.71 vs. 0.18 visits per patient, P < 0.001), an 89% decrease in HF-related readmissions (0.64 vs. 0.07 admissions per patient, P < 0.005), and a significant decrease in inpatient cost for HF-related visits. In controls receiving usual care, there was no significant change in hospitalizations, ED visits, or costs. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, CHWs are associated with reduced rehospitalizations, ED visits, and inpatient costs in low-socioeconomic, urban, minority patients with HF. CHWs may be a cost-effective method to reduce health care utilization and improve outcomes for this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam S. Vohra
- Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Rhys F. M. Chua
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Stephanie A. Besser
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Charina F. Alcain
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Sweta Basnet
- Urban Health Initiative, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL
| | - Brenda Battle
- Urban Health Initiative, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL
| | - Mitchell J. Coplan
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - James K. Liao
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Corey E. Tabit
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Smith H, Varshoei P, Boushey R, Kuziemsky C. Simulation modeling validity and utility in colorectal cancer screening delivery: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27:908-916. [PMID: 32417894 PMCID: PMC7309251 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2019] [Revised: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study sought to assess the impact and validity of simulation modeling in informing decision making in a complex area of healthcare delivery: colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS We searched 10 electronic databases for English-language articles published between January 1, 2008, and March 1, 2019, that described the development of a simulation model with a focus on average-risk CRC screening delivery. Included articles were reviewed for evidence that the model was validated, and provided real or potential contribution to informed decision making using the GRADE EtD (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Evidence to Decision) framework. RESULTS A total of 43 studies met criteria. The majority used Markov modeling (n = 31 [72%]) and sought to determine cost-effectiveness, compare screening modalities, or assess effectiveness of screening. No study reported full model validation and only (58%) reported conducting any validation. Majority of models were developed to address a specific health systems or policy question; few articles report the model's impact on this decision (n = 39 [91%] vs. n = 5 [12%]). Overall, models provided evidence relevant to every element important to decision makers as outlined in the GRADE EtD framework. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Simulation modeling contributes evidence that is considered valuable to decision making in CRC screening delivery, particularly in assessing cost-effectiveness and comparing screening modalities. However, the actual impact on decisions and validity of models is lacking in the literature. Greater validity testing, impact assessment, and standardized reporting of both is needed to understand and demonstrate the reliability and utility of simulation modeling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather Smith
- Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Peyman Varshoei
- Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robin Boushey
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Craig Kuziemsky
- Office of Research Services, MacEwan University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Mateos B, Sáez-González E, Moret I, Hervás D, Iborra M, Cerrillo E, Tortosa L, Nos P, Beltrán B. Plasma Oncostatin M, TNF-α, IL-7, and IL-13 Network Predicts Crohn's Disease Response to Infliximab, as Assessed by Calprotectin Log Drop. Dig Dis 2020; 39:1-9. [PMID: 32325460 DOI: 10.1159/000508069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2019] [Accepted: 04/22/2020] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cytokines emerge as possible biomarkers of response in Crohn's disease (CD). We aimed to determine the plasmatic cytokine profiles of active CD patients who started infliximab (IFX) treatment and their capacity to predict the response to IFX. METHODS A total of 30 active CD patients receiving an induction therapy of IFX were enrolled in the study. Peripheral blood samples pretreatment were collected. Concentrations of 15 cytokines were measured by Luminex technology. Responses to IFX were evaluated by the drop in fecal calprotectin based on its logarithm-transformed values. A random forest (RF) predictive model was used for data analyses. RESULTS Samples of 22 patients were analyzed. The RF model ranked the following cytokines as the top predictors of the response: tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), interleukin (IL)-13, oncostatin M (OSM), and IL-7 (p < 0.005). Partial dependency plots showed that high levels of IL-13 pretreatment, low TNFα levels, and low IL-7 levels were associated with a favorable IFX response. Increased levels of OSM and TNFα predicted unfavorable responses to IFX. CONCLUSIONS We here show that a log drop in calprotectin strongly correlates with clinical parameters and it can be proposed as a useful objective clinical response predictor. Plasma TNFα, IL-13, Il-7, and OSM network could predict CD response to IFX before induction therapy, as assessed by calprotectin log drop.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beatriz Mateos
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| | - Esteban Sáez-González
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain
| | - Inés Moret
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain.,Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain
| | - David Hervás
- Biostatictics Unit, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain
| | - Marisa Iborra
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain.,Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain
| | - Elena Cerrillo
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain
| | - Luis Tortosa
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain.,Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain
| | - Pilar Nos
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain.,Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain
| | - Belén Beltrán
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain, .,Inflammatory Bowel Disease Research Group, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain, .,Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain,
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Sharma N, Harris E, Lloyd J, Mistry SK, Harris M. Community health workers involvement in preventative care in primary healthcare: a systematic scoping review. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e031666. [PMID: 31852698 PMCID: PMC6937114 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2019] [Revised: 11/04/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To review effective models of community health worker (CHW) involvement in preventive care for disadvantaged culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) patients in primary healthcare (PHC) that may be applicable to the Australian context. DESIGN Systematic scoping review. DATA SOURCES The studies were gathered through searching Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and online portals of relevant organisations. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA All selected studies were original research studies which essentially evaluated preventive intervention undertake by CHWs in PHC. The intervened population were adults with or without diagnosed chronic health disease, culturally and linguistically diverse, or vulnerable due to geographic, economic and/or cultural characteristics that impede or compromise their access to healthcare. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data extraction was undertaken systematically in an excel spreadsheet while the findings were synthesised in a narrative manner. The quality appraisal of the selected studies was performed using effective public health practice project quality assessment tool. RESULTS A total of 1066 articles were identified during the initial search of six bibliographic databases. After screening the title, abstract and full text, 37 articles met the selection and methodological criteria and underwent data extraction. A high-quality evidence-base supporting the positive impact of CHWs supporting patients' access to healthcare and influencing positive behaviour change was found. Positive impacts of CHW interventions included improvements in clinical disease indicators, screening rates and behavioural change. Education-focused interventions were more effective in improving patient behaviour, whereas navigation interventions were most effective in improving access to services. Implementation was enhanced by cultural and linguistic congruence and specific training of CHWs in the intervention but reduced by short duration interventions, dropouts and poor adherence of patients. CONCLUSION The evidence generated from this systematic scoping review demonstrates the contribution of CHWs to improving access to preventive care for patients from CALD and disadvantaged backgrounds by providing both education and navigational interventions. More research is needed on CHW training and the incorporation of CHWs into primary health care (PHC) teams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nila Sharma
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Elizabeth Harris
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jane Lloyd
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sabuj Kanti Mistry
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mark Harris
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kline RM, Rocque GB, Rohan EA, Blackley KA, Cantril CA, Pratt-Chapman ML, Burris HA, Shulman LN. Patient Navigation in Cancer: The Business Case to Support Clinical Needs. J Oncol Pract 2019; 15:585-590. [PMID: 31509483 PMCID: PMC8790714 DOI: 10.1200/jop.19.00230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/01/2019] [Indexed: 08/02/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Patient navigation (PN) is an increasingly recognized element of high-quality, patient-centered cancer care, yet PN in many cancer programs is absent or limited, often because of concerns of extra cost without tangible financial benefits. METHODS Five real-world examples of PN programs are used to demonstrate that in the pure fee-for-service and the alternative payment model worlds of reimbursement, strong cases can be made to support the benefits of PN. RESULTS In three large programs, PN resulted in increased patient retention and increased physician loyalty within the cancer programs, leading to increased revenue. In addition, in two programs, PN was associated with a reduction in unnecessary resource utilization, such as emergency department visits and hospitalizations. PN also reduces burdens on oncology providers, potentially reducing burnout, errors, and costly staff turnover. CONCLUSION PN has resulted in improved patient outcomes and patient satisfaction and has important financial benefits for cancer programs in the fee-for-service and the alternative payment model worlds, lending support for more robust staffing of PN programs.
Collapse
|
12
|
Mohan G, Chattopadhyay SK, Ekwueme DU, Sabatino SA, Okasako-Schmucker DL, Peng Y, Mercer SL, Thota AB. Economics of Multicomponent Interventions to Increase Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Community Guide Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med 2019; 57:557-567. [PMID: 31477431 PMCID: PMC6886701 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2019] [Revised: 03/19/2019] [Accepted: 03/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT The Community Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended multicomponent interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening based on strong evidence of effectiveness. This systematic review examines the economic evidence to guide decisions on the implementation of these interventions. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature search for economic evidence was performed from January 2004 to January 2018. All monetary values were reported in 2016 US dollars, and the analysis was completed in 2018. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Fifty-three studies were included in the body of evidence from a literature search yield of 8,568 total articles. For multicomponent interventions to increase breast cancer screening, the median intervention cost per participant was $26.69 (interquartile interval [IQI]=$3.25, $113.72), and the median incremental cost per additional woman screened was $147.64 (IQI=$32.92, $924.98). For cervical cancer screening, the median costs per participant and per additional woman screened were $159.80 (IQI=$117.62, $214.73) and $159.49 (IQI=$64.74, $331.46), respectively. Two studies reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of $748 and $33,433. For colorectal cancer screening, the median costs per participant and per additional person screened were $36.63 (IQI=$7.70, $139.23) and $582.44 (IQI=$91.10, $1,452.12), respectively. Two studies indicated a decline in incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of $1,651 and $3,817. CONCLUSIONS Multicomponent interventions to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screening were cost effective based on a very conservative threshold. Additionally, multicomponent interventions for colorectal cancer screening demonstrated net cost savings. Cost effectiveness for multicomponent interventions to increase breast cancer screening could not be determined owing to the lack of studies reporting incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Future studies estimating this outcome could assist implementers with decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giridhar Mohan
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Sajal K Chattopadhyay
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
| | - Donatus U Ekwueme
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Susan A Sabatino
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Devon L Okasako-Schmucker
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Yinan Peng
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Shawna L Mercer
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Anilkrishna B Thota
- Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Nalepinski DC. NAVIGATING THE CANCER EXPERIENCE. Cancer 2019. [DOI: 10.1002/9781119645214.ch8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
|
14
|
Qian F, Gates M, Bisner S, Collins E, Vora S, Dacus H. Benefits, Cost, and Activities of Patient Navigation (PN) Program for Colorectal Cancer Screening at the Charles B. Wang Community Health Center (CBWCHC). J Immigr Minor Health 2019; 22:476-483. [PMID: 31254139 DOI: 10.1007/s10903-019-00913-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
To evaluate the benefits of a PN program for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at Charles B. Wang Community Health Center (CBWCHC) in New York City from June 2012 to May 2015, estimate the cost of implementation, and describe time allocation patterns of PN activities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants of the CBWCHC in 2015. The electronic PN database was used to evaluate the program's effectiveness. New York State Department of Health budgeting and cost data were used to estimate the implementation cost. Self-reported activities of PNs were used to analyze time allocation patterns. A total of 3723 screen-eligible patients were contacted by PNs and 2552 (68.5%) completed at least one CRC screening test. Of these, 266 (10.4%) patients were diagnosed with precancerous polyps and two patients were diagnosed with CRC. The CRC screening rate at CBWCHC increased from 56% to 60% during the program period. The total cost was estimated to be $295,296.51 (in 2014 dollar terms). Overall, this relatively inexpensive CRC screening PN program was effective in increasing CRC screening in a low-income Asian-American community.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Feng Qian
- Department of Health Policy, Management, and Behavior, School of Public Health, University at Albany - State University of New York, Rensselaer, NY, 12144-3445, USA.
| | - Margaret Gates
- Bureau of Cancer Prevention and Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA
| | - Sharon Bisner
- Bureau of Cancer Prevention and Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA
| | - Elisè Collins
- Bureau of Cancer Prevention and Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA
| | - Shalini Vora
- Center for Comprehensive Care and Diagnosis of Inherited Blood Disorders, Orange, CA, USA
| | - Heather Dacus
- Bureau of Cancer Prevention and Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Li Y, Carlson E, Hernández DA, Green B, Calle T, Kumaresan T, Madondo K, Martinez M, Villarreal R, Meraz L, Pagán JA. Patient Perception and Cost-Effectiveness of a Patient Navigation Program to Improve Breast Cancer Screening for Hispanic Women. Health Equity 2019; 3:280-286. [PMID: 31236527 PMCID: PMC6588102 DOI: 10.1089/heq.2018.0089] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Hispanic women are less likely to be screened for breast cancer than non-Hispanic women, which contributes to the disproportionate prevalence of advanced-stage breast cancer in this population group. Patient navigation may be a promising approach to help women overcome the complexity of accessing multiple health care services related to breast cancer screening and treatment. The goal of this study is to assess patient perception and cost-effectiveness of a multilevel, community-based patient navigation program to improve breast cancer screening among Hispanic women in South Texas. Methods: We used mixed methods-including focus groups of program participants and a microsimulation model of breast cancer-to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the program on the target population. Program data from 2013 to 2016 were collected and used to conduct the analyses. Results: Focus groups showed that the patient navigation program improved patient knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding breast health and increased the mammography screening rate from 60% to 80%. Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the program could increase life expectancy by 0.71 years and yield an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $3120 per quality-adjusted life year compared to no intervention. Conclusion: The 3-year multilevel, community-based patient navigation program effectively increased mammography screening uptake and adherence and improved knowledge and behaviors on breast health among program participants. Future research is needed to translate and disseminate the program to other socioeconomic and demographic groups to test its robustness and design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yan Li
- Center for Health Innovation, The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Erin Carlson
- College of Nursing and Health Innovation, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas
| | - Denise A. Hernández
- College of Architecture, Planning and Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas
| | - Brandie Green
- College of Architecture, Planning and Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas
| | - Tania Calle
- Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts
| | | | - Kumbirai Madondo
- Center for Health Innovation, The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Mariluz Martinez
- Research and Information Management, University Health System, San Antonio, Texas
| | - Roberto Villarreal
- Research and Information Management, University Health System, San Antonio, Texas
| | - Leah Meraz
- Research and Information Management, University Health System, San Antonio, Texas
| | - José A. Pagán
- Center for Health Innovation, The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York
- Department of Public Health Policy and Management, College of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, New York
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Bernardo BM, Zhang X, Beverly Hery CM, Meadows RJ, Paskett ED. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs across the cancer continuum: A systematic review. Cancer 2019; 125:2747-2761. [PMID: 31034604 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 84] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2018] [Revised: 03/04/2019] [Accepted: 03/27/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Published studies regarding patient navigation (PN) and cancer were reviewed to assess quality, determine gaps, and identify avenues for future research. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for studies investigating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of PN across the cancer continuum. Each included article was scored independently by 2 separate reviewers with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. The current review identified 113 published articles that assessed PN and cancer care, between August 1, 2010, and February 1, 2018, 14 of which reported on the cost-effectiveness of PN programs. Most publications focused on the effectiveness of PN in screening (50%) and diagnosis (27%) along the continuum of cancer care. Many described the effectiveness of PN for breast cancer (52%) or colorectal cancer outcomes (51%). Most studies reported favorable outcomes for PN programs, including increased uptake of and adherence to cancer screenings, timely diagnostic resolution and follow-up, higher completion rates for cancer therapy, and higher rates of attending medical appointments. Cost-effectiveness studies showed that PN programs yielded financial benefits. Quality assessment showed that 75 of the 113 included articles (65%) had 2 or more weak components. In conclusion, this review indicates numerous gaps within the PN and cancer literature where improvement is needed. For example, more research is needed at other points along the continuum of cancer care outside of screening and diagnosis. In addition, future research into the effectiveness of PN for understudied cancers outside of breast and colorectal cancer is necessary along with an assessment of cost-effectiveness and more rigorous reporting of study designs and results in published articles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittany M Bernardo
- Division of Population Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Xiaochen Zhang
- Division of Population Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Chloe M Beverly Hery
- Division of Population Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Rachel J Meadows
- Division of Population Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Electra D Paskett
- Division of Population Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rice K, Sharma K, Li C, Butterly L, Gersten J, DeGroff A. Cost-effectiveness of a patient navigation intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income adults in New Hampshire. Cancer 2018; 125:601-609. [PMID: 30548480 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2018] [Revised: 09/19/2018] [Accepted: 10/19/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colonoscopy is the most widely used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test in the United States. Through the detection and removal of potentially precancerous polyps, it can prevent CRC. However, CRC screening remains low among adults who are recommended for screening. The New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program implemented a patient navigation (PN) intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income patients in health centers in New Hampshire. In the current study, the authors examined the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS A decision tree model was constructed using Markov state transitions to calculate the costs and effectiveness associated with PN. Costs were calculated for the implementation of PN in a statewide public health program and in endoscopy centers. The main study outcome was colonoscopy screening completion. The main decision variable was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with the PN intervention compared with usual care. RESULTS The average cost per screening with PN was $1089 (95% confidence interval, $1075-$1103) compared with $894 with usual care (95% confidence interval, $886-$908). Among patients who were navigated, approximately 96.2% completed colonoscopy screening compared with 69.3% of those receiving usual care (odds ratio, 11.2; P <. 001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicated that 1 additional screening completion cost approximately $725 in a public health program and $548 in an endoscopy center with PN compared with usual care, both of which are less than the average Medicare reimbursement of $737 for a colonoscopy procedure. CONCLUSIONS PN was found to be cost-effective in increasing colonoscopy screening among low-income adults in the New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program, even at the threshold of current Medicare reimbursement rates for colonoscopy. The results of the current study support the implementation of PN in statewide public health programs and endoscopy centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ketra Rice
- Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Krishna Sharma
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Chunyu Li
- Division of Global HIV and TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Lynn Butterly
- New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program, Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital, Lebanon, New Hampshire.,Department of Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Joanne Gersten
- New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program, Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Amy DeGroff
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Mehta SJ, Khan T, Guerra C, Reitz C, McAuliffe T, Volpp KG, Asch DA, Doubeni CA. A Randomized Controlled Trial of Opt-in Versus Opt-Out Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach. Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113:1848-1854. [PMID: 29925915 PMCID: PMC6768589 DOI: 10.1038/s41395-018-0151-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES METHODS:: RESULTS:: Patients randomized to opt-in agreed to participate 23.1% of the time, and only 2.5% of those in opt-out chose not to participate. FIT kits were mailed to 22.4% and 93% of patients in opt-in and opt-out arms, respectively. In intention-to-screen analysis, patients in the opt-out arm had a higher FIT completion rate (29.1%) than in the opt-in arm (9.6%) (absolute difference 19.5%; 95% confidence interval, 10.9-27.9%; P < .001). Results were similar in subgroup analysis of those sent initial messaging through the EHR portal (9.5% opt-in versus 37.5% in opt-out). CONCLUSIONS .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shivan J Mehta
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Tanya Khan
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Carmen Guerra
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Catherine Reitz
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Timothy McAuliffe
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Kevin G Volpp
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - David A Asch
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Leonard and Madlyn Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Changoor NR, Pak LM, Nguyen LL, Bleday R, Trinh Q, Koehlmoos T, Learn PA, Haider AH, Goldberg JE. Effect of an equal‐access military health system on racial disparities in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer 2018; 124:3724-3732. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2018] [Revised: 05/16/2018] [Accepted: 05/21/2018] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Navin R. Changoor
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
- Howard University College of MedicineWashington District of Columbia
| | - Linda M. Pak
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBoston Massachusetts
| | - Louis L. Nguyen
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
| | - Ronald Bleday
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBoston Massachusetts
| | - Quoc‐Dien Trinh
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
| | - Tracey Koehlmoos
- Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesBethesda Maryland
| | - Peter A. Learn
- Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesBethesda Maryland
| | - Adil H. Haider
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBoston Massachusetts
| | - Joel E. Goldberg
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public HealthBoston Massachusetts
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBoston Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Sunny A, Rustveld L. The Role of Patient Navigation on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion and Education: a Review of the Literature. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2018; 33:251-259. [PMID: 27878766 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-016-1140-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
Although the general assumption is that patient navigation helps patients adhere to CRC screening recommendations, concrete evidence for its effectiveness is still currently under investigation. The present literature review was conducted to explore effectiveness of patient navigation and education on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening completion in medically underserved populations. Data collection included PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane reviews searches. Study inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials and prospective investigations that included an intervention and control group. Case series, brief communications, commentaries, case reports, and uncontrolled studies were excluded. Twenty-seven of the 36 studies screened for relevance were selected for inclusion. Most studies explored the utility of lay and clinic-based patient navigation. Others implemented interventions that included tailored messaging, and culturally and linguistically appropriate outreach and education efforts to meet CRC screening needs of medically underserved individuals. More recent studies have begun to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses of patient navigation programs that impacted CRC screening and completion. Peer-reviewed publications consistently indicate a positive impact of patient navigation programs on CRC screening completion, as well have provided preliminary evidence for their cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ajeesh Sunny
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Luis Rustveld
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Mehta SJ, Feingold J, Vandertuyn M, Niewood T, Cox C, Doubeni CA, Volpp KG, Asch DA. Active Choice and Financial Incentives to Increase Rates of Screening Colonoscopy-A Randomized Controlled Trial. Gastroenterology 2017; 153:1227-1229.e2. [PMID: 28734830 PMCID: PMC5669820 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2017] [Revised: 07/07/2017] [Accepted: 07/11/2017] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Behavioral economic approaches could increase uptake for colorectal cancer screening. We performed a randomized controlled trial of 2245 employees to determine whether an email containing a phone number for scheduling (control), an email with the active choice to opt in or opt out (active choice), or the active choice email plus a $100 incentive (financial incentive) increased colonoscopy completion within 3 months. Higher proportions of participants in the financial incentive group underwent screening (3.7%) than in the control (1.6%) or active choice groups (1.5%) (P = .01 and P < .01). We found no difference in uptake of screening between the active choice and control groups (P = .88). The $100 conditional incentive modestly but significantly increased colonoscopy use. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02660671.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shivan J Mehta
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| | - Jordyn Feingold
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Matthew Vandertuyn
- Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Tess Niewood
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Catherine Cox
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Kevin G Volpp
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - David A Asch
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Singal AG, Gupta S, Skinner CS, Ahn C, Santini NO, Agrawal D, Mayorga CA, Murphy C, Tiro JA, McCallister K, Sanders JM, Bishop WP, Loewen AC, Halm EA. Effect of Colonoscopy Outreach vs Fecal Immunochemical Test Outreach on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2017; 318:806-815. [PMID: 28873161 PMCID: PMC5648645 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.11389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results. OBJECTIVE Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings. INTERVENTIONS Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n = 2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n = 2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n = 1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation). RESULTS All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P < .001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .08 and P < .13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amit G Singal
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Samir Gupta
- Division of Gastroenterology, Veterans Affairs San Diego Health Care System, San Diego, California
- Department of Internal Medicine, Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla
| | - Celette Sugg Skinner
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Chul Ahn
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | | | - Deepak Agrawal
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Christian A Mayorga
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Caitlin Murphy
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Jasmin A Tiro
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Katharine McCallister
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Joanne M Sanders
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Wendy Pechero Bishop
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Adam C Loewen
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| | - Ethan A Halm
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Tangka FKL, Subramanian S, Hoover S, Royalty J, Joseph K, DeGroff A, Joseph D, Chattopadhyay S. Costs of promoting cancer screening: Evidence from CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING 2017; 62:67-72. [PMID: 27989647 PMCID: PMC5840873 DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2016] [Accepted: 12/11/2016] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) provided funding to 29 grantees to increase colorectal cancer screening. We describe the screening promotion costs of CRCCP grantees to evaluate the extent to which the program model resulted in the use of funding to support interventions recommended by the Guide to Community Preventive Services (Community Guide). We analyzed expenditures for screening promotion for the first three years of the CRCCP to assess cost per promotion strategy, and estimated the cost per person screened at the state level based on various projected increases in screening rates. All grantees engaged in small media activities and more than 90% used either client reminders, provider assessment and feedback, or patient navigation. Based on all expenditures, projected cost per eligible person screened for a 1%, 5%, and 10% increase in state-level screening proportions are $172, $34, and $17, respectively. CRCCP grantees expended the majority of their funding on Community Guide recommended screening promotion strategies but about a third was spent on other interventions. Based on this finding, future CRC programs should be provided with targeted education and information on evidence-based strategies, rather than broad based recommendations, to ensure that program funds are expended mainly on evidence-based interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florence K L Tangka
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA.
| | - Sujha Subramanian
- RTI International, 307 Waverley Oaks Road, Suite 101, Waltham, MA 02452, USA
| | - Sonja Hoover
- RTI International, 307 Waverley Oaks Road, Suite 101, Waltham, MA 02452, USA
| | - Janet Royalty
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA
| | - Kristy Joseph
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA
| | - Amy DeGroff
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA
| | - Djenaba Joseph
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA
| | - Sajal Chattopadhyay
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-76, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Simon-Tuval T, Neumann PJ, Greenberg D. Cost-effectiveness of adherence-enhancing interventions: a systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2016; 16:67-84. [DOI: 10.1586/14737167.2016.1138858] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
|
25
|
Vetto JT. Editorial: Colorectal Cancer Screening Education in Medically Vulnerable Populations: the Role of the Journal of Cancer Education. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2015; 30:611-613. [PMID: 26423056 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-015-0922-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- John T Vetto
- Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 S.W. Sam Jackson Park Rd., Mail code L619, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Childers RE, Williams JL, Sonnenberg A. Practice patterns of sedation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82:503-11. [PMID: 25851159 PMCID: PMC4540687 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2014] [Accepted: 01/15/2015] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sedative and analgesic medications have been used routinely for decades to provide patient comfort, reduce procedure time, and improve examination quality during colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE To evaluate trends of sedation during colonoscopy in the United States. SETTING Endoscopic data repository of U.S. gastroenterology practices (Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative, CORI database from 2000 until 2013). PATIENTS The study population was made up of patients undergoing a total of 1,385,436 colonoscopies. INTERVENTIONS Colonoscopy without any intervention or with mucosal biopsy, polypectomy, various means of hemostasis, luminal dilation, stent placement, or ablation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Dose of midazolam, diazepam, fentanyl, meperidine, diphenhydramine, promethazine, and propofol used for sedation during colonoscopy. RESULTS During the past 14 years, midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol have become the most commonly used sedatives for colonoscopy. Except for benzodiazepines, which were dosed higher in women than men, equal doses of sedation were given to female and male patients. White patients were given higher doses than other ethnic groups undergoing sedation for colonoscopy. Except for histamine-1 receptor antagonists, all sedative medications were given at lower doses to patients with increasing age. The dose of sedatives was higher in colonoscopies associated with procedural interventions or of long duration. LIMITATIONS Potential for incomplete or incorrect documentation in the database. CONCLUSION The findings reflect on colonoscopy practice in the United States during the last 14 years and provide an incentive for future research on how sex and ethnicity influence sedation practices.
Collapse
|