Barriers to colorectal cancer screening among Medicare consumers

Lifetime prevalence and correlates of colorectal cancer screening among low-income U.S. Veterans

PURPOSE

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest integrated healthcare system in the U.S. While preventive healthcare services are high priority in the VHA, low-income U.S. Veterans experience adverse life circumstances that may negatively impact their access to these services. This study examined lifetime prevalence as well as demographic, socioeconomic, military-specific, and clinical correlates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among low-income U.S. Veterans ≥ 50 years of age.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data on 862 participants were analyzed from the 2021-2022 National Veteran Homeless and Other Poverty Experiences study.

RESULTS

Overall, 55.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51.3-59.3%) reported ever-receiving CRC-screening services. In a multivariable logistic regression model, never-receivers of CRC screening were twice as likely to reside outside of the Northeast, and more likely to be married (odds ratio [OR] = 1.86, 95% CI 1.02, 3.37), have BMI < 25 kg/m2 [vs. 25- < 30 kg/m2] (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.19, 2.58), or ≥ 1 chronic condition (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.06, 2.02). Never-receivers of CRC screening were less likely to be female (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.29, 0.96), aged 65-79y [vs. ≥ 80y] (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40, 0.92), live in 5 + member households (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13, 0.86), disabled (OR = 0.45, 0.22, 0.92), with purchased health insurance (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.33, 0.98), or report alcohol-use disorder (OR = 0.10, 95% CI 0.02, 0.49) and/or HIV/AIDS (OR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.12, 0.68).

CONCLUSION

Nearly 55% of low-income U.S. Veterans reported ever screening for CRC. Variations in CRC-screening behaviors according to veteran characteristics highlight potential disparities as well as opportunities for targeted behavioral interventions.

Associations between sociodemographic factors and breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the United States

PURPOSE

Cancer is the second leading cause of death globally and in the U.S., but screening can reduce cancer-related deaths. We analyzed data from a nationwide survey to compare how sociodemographic factors were associated with never or not timely screening for multiple types of cancer, and the use of different colorectal cancer screening procedures.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the 2019 U.S. National Health Interview Survey. To understand breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening participation among those recommended to screen, we respectively analyzed 8,110 women 45 to 74 years of age, 9,583 women 21 to 65 years of age, and 13,497 individuals 50 to 75 years of age at survey. Weighted Poisson regression was used to estimate the unadjusted and confounding-adjusted prevalence ratio and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

In our analysis populations, 6.9% never had a mammogram, 14.6% never screened for cervical cancer, and 26.8% never screened for colorectal cancer; the prevalence respectively increased to 24.7%, 23.8%, and 32.3% for not timely screening according to national guidelines. The prevalence of never screening was 81.9% for non-invasive colorectal cancer tests, compared with 32.5% for colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. Individuals with lower education level, with no health insurance, or in poverty had higher prevalence of never screening for all three cancers. There was low sociodemographic disparity for the use of non-invasive colorectal cancer screening tests.

CONCLUSION

Socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals have higher prevalence of never or not timely screening. The utilization of non-invasive colorectal cancer screening procedures remains low across sociodemographic groups.

Effectiveness and implementation of mPATH™-CRC: a mobile health system for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely recommended but underused, even though CRC is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the USA. The mPATH™ program is an iPad-based application designed to identify patients due for CRC screening, educate them on the commonly used screening tests, and help them select their best option, with the goal of increasing CRC screening rates.

METHODS

The mPATH™ program consists of questions asked of all adult patients at check-in (mPATH™-CheckIn), as well as a module specific for patients due for CRC screening (mPATH™-CRC). In this study, the mPATH™ program is evaluated through a Type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness design. Specifically, the study consists of three parts: (1) a cluster-randomized controlled trial of primary care clinics comparing a "high touch" evidence-based implementation strategy with a "low touch" implementation strategy; (2) a nested pragmatic study evaluating the effectiveness of mPATH-CRC™ on completion of CRC screening; and (3) a mixed-methods study evaluating factors that facilitate or impede the maintenance of interventions like mPATH-CRC™. The primary objective is to compare the proportion of patients aged 50-74 who are eligible for CRC screening who complete mPATH™-CRC in the 6th month following implementation between the "high touch" and "low touch" implementation strategies. Effectiveness of mPATH™-CRC is evaluated by comparing the proportion who complete CRC screening within 16 weeks of their visit to the clinic between a pre-implementation cohort (8 months before implementation) and a post-implementation cohort (8 months after implementation).

DISCUSSION

This study will provide data on both the implementation of the mPATH™ program and its effectiveness in improving screening rates for CRC. In addition, this work has the potential to have an even broader impact by identifying strategies to support the sustained use of other similar technology-based primary care interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03843957. Registered on 18 February 2019.

Practical considerations for colorectal cancer screening in older adults

Recent guidelines recommend that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening after age 75 be considered on an individualized basis, and discourage screening for people over 85 due to competing causes of mortality. Given the heterogeneity in the health of older individuals, and lack of data within current guidelines for personalized CRC screening approaches, there remains a need for a clearer framework to inform clinical decision-making. A revision of the current approach to CRC screening in older adults is even more compelling given the improvements in CRC treatment, post-treatment survival, and increasing life expectancy in the population. In this review, we aim to examine the personalization of CRC screening cessation based on specific factors influencing life and health expectancy such as comorbidity, frailty, and cognitive status. We will also review screening modalities and endoscopic technique for minimizing risk, the risks of screening unique to older adults, and CRC treatment outcomes in older patients, in order to provide important information to aid CRC screening decisions for this age group. This review article offers a unique approach to this topic from both the gastroenterologist and geriatrician perspective by reviewing the use of specific clinical assessment tools, and addressing technical aspects of screening colonoscopy and periprocedural management to mitigate screening-related complications.

Barriers to utilization of three colorectal cancer screening options - Data from a national survey

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening continues to be underutilized in the United States. A better understanding of existing barriers is critical for improving uptake of, and adherence to, CRC screening. Using data from a population-based panel survey, we examined barriers to utilization of three commonly used screening options (FIT/gFOBT, mt-sDNA, and screening colonoscopy) and assessed differences by socio-demographic characteristics, healthcare access, and health status. Data were obtained from a questionnaire developed by the authors and implemented through a U.S. national panel survey conducted in November 2019. Among 5,097 invited panelists, 1,595 completed the survey (31.3%). Analyses were focused on individuals ages 50-75 at average risk for CRC. Results showed that among respondents who reported no prior CRC screening with FIT/gFOBT, mt-sDNA, or colonoscopy, the top barriers were lack of knowledge (FIT/gFOBT: 42.1%, mt-sDNA: 44.9%, colonoscopy: 34.7%), lack of provider recommendation (FIT/gFOBT: 32.1%, mt-sDNA: 27.3%, colonoscopy: 18.6%), and suboptimal access (FIT/gFOBT: 20.8%, mt-sDNA: 17.8%, colonoscopy: 26%). Among participants who had used one or two of the screening options, the top barriers to FIT/gFOBT and mt-sDNA were lack of provider recommendation (31.6% & 37.5%) and lack of knowledge (24.6% & 25.6%), while for colonoscopy top barriers were psychosocial barriers (31%) and lack of provider recommendation (22.7%). Differences by sex, race/ethnicity, income level, and health status were observed. Our research identified primary barriers to the utilization of three endorsed CRC screening options and differences by patient characteristics, highlighting the importance of improving CRC screening education and considering patient preferences in screening recommendations.

Barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in Asia

Purpose

One of the most common cancers in Asia is colorectal cancer (CRC). Early diagnosis and timely treatment are necessary for preventing complications and advanced stages of the disease. It is important to evaluate barriers and facilitators of screening in different countries. This systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of CRC screening in Asia.

Methods

In this systematic review, for identifying barriers and facilitators of CRC screening, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus in 12 December 2020. Combination keywords such as colorectal cancer, screening, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, faecal occult blood test, barriers, facilitators and the names of each Asian country were used for searching. Full text original studies in English language were accepted in the review.

Results

In total, 36 articles were included in the review. Barriers and facilitators were evaluated. The most common reported barriers were lack of knowledge, fear of result, fear of procedure, fear of pain, lack of awareness, high cost and lack of gastrointestinal symptoms. The most frequent facilitators were having knowledge and awareness of CRC screening, perceived risk and severity, family history of cancer and physician recommendation.

Conclusion

For promoting success in CRC screening programmes, knowing what the barriers and facilitators are is necessary. Awareness and various personal, professional and social factors have been shown to be the major barriers toward CRC screening in most Asian countries.

Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers in Rural Appalachia

OBJECTIVES

The age-appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rate in the rural Appalachian area is low compared with the national rate, which may account for the overall higher incidence of CRC in this area. The purpose of this study was to explore potential barriers to CRC screening in the West Virginia Appalachian area.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was designed to identify patient-reported barriers to CRC screening using the health belief model to assess their attitudes and behaviors. Autonomous paper-based surveys were randomly handed to individuals older than 50 years at various locations, including healthcare and nonhealthcare facilities. All of the responses were then categorized into two groups: the screened group and the unscreened group. Differences among both groups were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

There were three main areas that significantly accounted for the discrepancies between the screened and unscreened groups: perceptions of discomfort from screening tests, psychological and behavior deterrents in CRC screening and diagnosis, and limited resources for accessing care, especially transportation. In particular, psychological and behavioral deterrents in CRC screening appeared to play a role in promoting aversion to CRC screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of CRC screening awareness and knowledge may be responsible for fatalism regarding CRC and aversion to screening. Thus, multidisciplinary interventions that provide education about CRC screening, early intervention prognosis, and treatment options, as well as addressing systemic barriers to screening, such as assistance with scheduling, prep instructions, and transportation, can improve the screening rate in Appalachia and eventually lead to better outcomes through the early diagnosis of CRC.

Colorectal Cancer Screening and Access to Healthcare in New York City Taxi Drivers

This study examined differences in colorectal cancer screening across sociodemographic, migration, occupational, and health-related factors in a sample of male taxi drivers. Male drivers eligible for colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) (≥ 50 years old) were recruited in 55 community-based health fairs conducted during November 2015 to February 2017 in 16 taxi garages or community locations located in Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan and Bronx. Participants completed a survey that included sociodemographic, migration, occupational, health-related, and cancer screening practices. For this study 33 questions were analyzed. The sample consisted of 137 male drivers, 27% of them had undergone CRCS. Occupation-related factors, including night shifts and driving high numbers of weekly hours, were associated with lower CRCS rates; having a family history of cancer, health insurance, a regular source of primary care, and a routine check-up in the last year, were associated with higher CRCS rates. The findings suggest that drivers with health insurance and better access to primary care are more likely to be up-to-date with CRCS. The results provide important information that can inform occupation-based public health interventions.

National and State Estimates of Lost Earnings From Cancer Deaths in the United States

Importance

Information on the economic burden of cancer mortality can serve as a tool in setting policies and prioritizing resources for cancer prevention and control. However, contemporary data are lacking for the United States nationally and by state.

Objective

To estimate lost earnings due to death from cancer overall and for the major cancers in the United States nationally and by state.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Person-years of life lost (PYLL) were calculated using numbers of cancer deaths and life expectancy data in individuals aged 16 to 84 years who died from cancer in the United States in 2015. The annual median earnings in the United States were used to assign a monetary value for each PYLL by age and sex. Cancer mortality and life expectancy data were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics and annual median earnings from the US Census Bureau's 2016 Current Population Survey's March Annual Social and Economic Supplement. Data analysis was performed from October 22, 2018, to February 25, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Lost earnings due to cancer death, represented as estimated future wages in the absence of premature death.

Results

A total of 8 739 939 person-years of life were lost to cancer death in persons aged 16 to 84 years in the United States in 2015, translating to lost earnings of $94.4 billion (95% CI, $91.7 billion-$97.3 billion). For individual cancer sites, lost earnings were highest for lung cancer ($21.3 billion), followed by colorectal ($9.4 billion), female breast ($6.2 billion), and pancreatic ($6.1 billion) cancer. Age-standardized lost earning rates per 100 000 were lowest in the West and highest in the South, ranging from $19.6 million (95% CI, $19.1 million-$20.2 million) in Utah to $35.3 million ($34.4 million-$36.3 million) in Kentucky. Approximately 2.4 million PYLL and $27.7 billion (95% CI, $26.9 billion-$28.5 billion) in lost earnings (29.3% of total that occurred in 2015) would have been avoided in 2015 if all states had the same age-specific PYLL or lost earning rates as Utah.

Conclusions and Relevance

Our findings indicate large state variation in the economic burden of cancer and suggest the potential for substantial financial benefit through delivery of effective cancer prevention, screening, and treatment to minimize premature cancer mortality in all states.

The American Cancer Society 2035 challenge goal on cancer mortality reduction

A summary evaluation of the 2015 American Cancer Society (ACS) challenge goal showed that overall US mortality from all cancers combined declined 26% over the period from 1990 to 2015. Recent research suggests that US cancer mortality can still be lowered considerably by applying known interventions broadly and equitably. The ACS Board of Directors, therefore, commissioned ACS researchers to determine challenge goals for reductions in cancer mortality by 2035. A statistical model was used to estimate the average annual percent decline in overall cancer death rates among the US general population and among college-educated Americans during the most recent period. Then, the average annual percent decline in the overall cancer death rates of college graduates was applied to the death rates in the general population to project future rates in the United States beginning in 2020. If overall cancer death rates from 2020 through 2035 nationally decline at the pace of those of college graduates, then death rates in 2035 in the United States will drop by 38.3% from the 2015 level and by 54.4% from the 1990 level. On the basis of these results, the ACS 2035 challenge goal was set as a 40% reduction from the 2015 level. Achieving this goal could lead to approximately 1.3 million fewer cancer deaths than would have occurred from 2020 through 2035 and 122,500 fewer cancer deaths in 2035 alone. The results also show that reducing the prevalence of risk factors and achieving optimal adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines by 2025 could lead to a 33.5% reduction in the overall cancer death rate by 2035, attaining 85% of the challenge goal.

Patient-Reported Barriers to Completing a Diagnostic Colonoscopy Following Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Among Uninsured Patients

BACKGROUND

For colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to improve survival, patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) must follow-up with a diagnostic colonoscopy. Adherence to follow-up is low and patient-level barriers for suboptimal adherence have yet to be explored.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize barriers for non-completion of diagnostic colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT reported by under- and uninsured patients receiving care in a safety-net health system.

DESIGN

A longitudinal, cohort study of CRC screening outreach to 8565 patients using mailed FIT kits. Patients with abnormal FIT results received telephonic navigation to arrange for a no-cost diagnostic colonoscopy.

PATIENTS

Adults aged 50-64 years receiving care at a North Texas safety-net health system.

APPROACH

Descriptive analyses characterized the patient sample and reasons for lack of follow-up after abnormal FIT over the 3-year outreach program. Thematic qualitative analyses characterized reasons for lack of follow-up with a colonoscopy after the abnormal FIT.

KEY RESULTS

Of 689 patients with an abnormal FIT, 45% (n = 314) did not complete a follow-up colonoscopy. Among the 314 non-completers, 184 patients reported reasons for not completing a follow-up colonoscopy included health insurance-related challenges (38%), comorbid conditions (37%), social barriers such as transportation difficulties and lack of social support (29%), concerns about FIT/colonoscopy process (12%), competing life priorities (12%), adverse effects of bowel preparation (3%), and poor health literacy (3%). Among the 314 non-completers, 131 patients did not report a barrier, as 51% reported that that had completed a previous colonoscopy in the past 10 years, 10% refused with no reason, and 10% were never reached by phone.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies aimed at improving FIT screening and subsequent colonoscopy rates need to address the unique needs of patients for effective and sustainable screening programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01946282.

Effectiveness of Medicare cost-sharing elimination for Cancer screening on utilization

Background

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated the cost-sharing requirement for several preventive cancer screenings. This study examined the cancer screening utilization of mammogram, Pap smear and colonoscopy in Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) under the ACA.

Methods

The primary data were the 2007–2013 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked to FFS claims. The effect of the cost-sharing removal on the probability of receiving a preventive cancer screening test was estimated using a logistic regression, separately for each screening test, adjusting for the complex survey design. The model was also separately estimated for different socioeconomic and race/ethnic groups.

The study sample included beneficiaries with Part B coverage for the entire calendar year, excluding beneficiaries in Medicaid or Medicare Advantage plans. Beneficiaries with a claims-documented or self-reported history of targeted cancers, who were likely to have diagnostic tests or have surveillance screenings were excluded.

The screening measures were constructed separately following Medicare coverage and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations. We measured the screening utilization outcome drawing from claims data, as well as using the self-reported survey data.

Results

After the cost-sharing removal policy, we found no statistically significant difference in a beneficiary’s probability of receiving a colonoscopy (transition period: OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90–1.29; post-policy period: OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.83–1.42), a mammogram (transition period: OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.91–1.17; post-policy period: OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.88–1.30), or a biennial Pap smear (transition period: OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.69–1.09; post-policy period: OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.51–1.03) in claims-based measures following Medicare coverage. Similarly, we found null effects of the policy change on utilization of colonoscopy among enrollees 50–75 years old, biennial mammograms by women 50–74, and triennial Pap smear tests among women 21–65 in claims-based measures according to USPSTF. The findings from survey-based measures were consistent with the estimates from claims-based measures, except that the use of Pap smear declined since 2011. Further, the policy change did not increase utilization in patients with disadvantaged socioeconomic characteristics. Yet the disparate patterns in adjusted screening rates by socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity persisted over time.

Conclusions

Removing out-of-pocket costs for screenings did not provide enough incentives to increase the screening rates among Medicare beneficiaries.

Patients' self-reported barriers to colon cancer screening in federally qualified health center settings

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Despite evidence that screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality, only about 60% of age-eligible adults are up-to-date on CRC screening. This analysis aims to identify self-reported barriers to CRC screening among patients in a safety-net healthcare setting.

Participants were recruited from safety-net primary care sites that were participating in a trial to increase CRC screening. At baseline, patients (n = 483) completed self-report surveys that assessed demographics, healthcare and CRC screening. Barriers to CRC screening were assessed through an open-ended question. Using a basic text analysis, data were coded and organized into key topics.

Overall, 65.2% ever had CRC screening; 46.4% were up-to-date. Of those who described barriers (n = 198), 22.9% said they were not due for screening or their provider had not recommended it. Other common barriers included fear or worry about the procedure or outcome, financial challenges such as lack of insurance or cost of testing, and logistic challenges such as transportation and time. Fewer said that screening was of low importance or mentioned discomfort with the procedure or colonoscopy preparation.

In this safety-net setting, CRC screening rates were lower than national rates. These qualitative results are similar to quantitative findings reported in the literature but the qualitative data add to our understanding of patient-reported concerns and challenges faced by safety-net patients. These results may be applied to developing targeting communication or intervention strategies to improve CRC screening rates within safety-net health centers.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Colorectal Cancer Risk Awareness and Screening Uptake among Adults in the United Arab Emirates

United Arab Emirates initiated the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening on 2013. Yet, one of the barriers to participation in CRC screening is lack of knowledge about the importance of CRC, its risk factors, and the benefits that could be gained through screening. We aimed in this study to identify knowledge, attitude, and behavioral factors among the public that are associated with willingness to undergo CRC screening. A structured bilingual questionnaire in English and Arabic was designed by a multidisciplinary team and through a review of the literature. The survey consisted of four functional domains: socio-demographic characteristics, knowledge, attitude, and practice related questions. It was encouraging that more than 65% of the total participants surveyed for the study were aware of CRC and their main source of information was media (395, 66%). However, the majority (379, 64%) were thinking that CRC is not common, and did not hear of the screening test for CRC (401, 67%). An overall evaluation of the answers revealed a poor level of knowledge on risk factors of CRC, and only 40% correctly identified fecal occult blood as main test for CRC prevention. Surprisingly, 95% of participants mentioned that the CRC screening was not recommended to them by a physician. This is the first report analyzing the awareness, attitude and practice of UAE population and assessing the barriers for CRC screening. Our results demonstrate that better education and communication of the benefits of early detection of CRC should be addressed to improve the screening in UAE population. There is need for campaigns and educational programs, both for health care providers and public. Media might play a significant role in this aspect and new policies need to focus more on increasing community awareness on cancer preventive measures in UAE.

Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers by Two Methods

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

Decision-making and socioeconomic disparities in colonoscopy screening in African Americans

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status (SES) disparities in colorectal cancer screening are persistent. Lower education and income are both associated with lower screening rates. Both cognitive (e.g., perceived barriers) and affective (e.g., disgust, fear) decision-making constructs are known determinants of colorectal cancer screening behavior. This study tests the hypotheses that SES may be related to decision-making constructs and that this SES-decision-making construct relation may contribute to explaining the SES-screening behavior disparity.

METHOD

Surveys assessing perceived benefits and barriers to screening, self-efficacy, positive and negative affective associations with colonoscopy, fear of colonoscopy, colorectal cancer knowledge, past screening behavior, and demographics including education and income were completed by 2,015 African American participants ages 50 and older. Both univariable and multivariable relations of SES to decision-making constructs were examined, as were univariable and multivariable models of the indirect effect of SES on screening via decision-making constructs.

RESULTS

Socioeconomic status was related to both screening compliance and the decision-making constructs. Bootstrap modeling of the indirect effect showed that the total effect of the SES-screening behavior relation included an indirect effect via social cognitive decision-making constructs.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that cognitive and affective decision-making constructs account for at least some of the SES disparities in colorectal cancer screening behavior. As such, more research is needed to explore the intra individual-level influences of disparities in colorectal cancer screening. In addition, work is needed to develop effective intervention approaches to address the relation of SES to decision-making constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record

Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Racially Diverse Population Served by a Safety-Net Clinic

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the US, yet screening rates remain low among minority populations. The purpose of the current study was to identify differences in the endorsement of barriers to CRC screening and to evaluate the association between provider recommendation and CRC screening adherence among Hispanic, Pacific Islander and White patients. This study utilized a cross sectional survey design to identify patient-reported barriers to CRC screening. Logistic regression was utilized to evaluate the association between patient demographic characteristics (race/ethnicity, gender, age), having received provider recommendation, and patient awareness of CRC screening. The study sample was comprised of a diverse population (N = 197); 48% Hispanic, 25% White, 10% Pacific Islander, 4% Black and 13% other races/ethnicity. The median age of participants was 58, yet fewer than 30% were up-to-date for CRC screening. The most commonly cited barriers included fear of test results (27.6%), inability to leave work for a CRC screening appointment (26.9%), being unaware of the need for colonoscopy (25.4%), and lack of provider recommendation for CRC screening (24.9%). Only 16.2% of participants reported that a provider had discussed CRC screening options with them. After adjusting for age and gender, Hispanic patients were less likely to report having had a provider discuss CRC screening options compared to White patients (OR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.09-0.68, p < 0.05). The findings from this study indicate that patient's perceived screening barriers, lack of awareness and a lack of provider communication about CRC screening options may contribute to low screening rates among minority populations.

Using Evidence-Based Interventions to Improve Cancer Screening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program

CONTEXT

The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) provides cancer screening to low-income, un-, and underinsured women through more than 11 000 primary care clinics. The program is well-positioned to work with health systems to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to increase screening among all women.

OBJECTIVE

To collect baseline data on EBI use, evaluation of EBIs, and related training needs among NBCCEDP grantees.

DESIGN

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted a Web-based survey in late 2013 among NBCCEDP grantees for the period July 2012 to June 2013. This was the first systematic assessment of EBIs among NBCCEDP grantees.

SETTING

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's NBCCEDP.

PARTICIPANTS

Primarily program directors/coordinators for all 67 NBCCEDP grantees.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Data captured were used to assess implementation of 5 EBIs, their evaluation, and related training needs. Frequencies and proportions were determined. Cluster analysis identified grantees with similar patterns of EBI use for NBCCEDP clients and providers.

RESULTS

On average, 4.1 of 5 EBIs were implemented per grantee for NBCCEDP clients and providers. Four clusters were identified including "high overall EBI users," "high provider EBI users," "high EBI users with no provider assessment and feedback," and "high client EBI users." Only 1.8 EBIs were implemented, on average, with non-NBCCEDP clients and providers. Fewer than half (n = 32, 47.8%) of grantees conducted process or outcome evaluation of 1 or more EBIs. Overall, 47.6% of grantees reported high or medium training needs for client-oriented EBIs and 54.3% for provider-oriented EBIs.

CONCLUSIONS

The NBCCEDP grantees are implementing EBIs extensively with clients and providers. Increased EBI use among non-NBCCEDP clients/providers is needed to extend the NBCCEDP's reach and impact. Grantee training and technical assistance is necessary across EBIs. In addition, grantees' use of process and outcome evaluation of EBI implementation must be increased to inform effective program implementation.

Intervention Mediators in a Randomized Controlled Trial to Increase Colonoscopy Uptake Among Individuals at Increased Risk of Familial Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Understanding the pathways by which interventions achieve behavioral change is important for optimizing intervention strategies.

PURPOSE

We examined mediators of behavior change in a tailored-risk communication intervention that increased guideline-based colorectal cancer screening among individuals at increased familial risk.

METHODS

Participants at increased familial risk for colorectal cancer (N = 481) were randomized to one of two arms: (1) a remote, tailored-risk communication intervention (Tele-Cancer Risk Assessment and Evaluation (TeleCARE)) or (2) a mailed educational brochure intervention.

RESULTS

Structural equation modeling showed that participants in TeleCARE were more likely to get a colonoscopy. The effect was partially mediated through perceived threat (β = 0.12, p < 0.05), efficacy beliefs (β = 0.12, p < 0.05), emotions (β = 0.22, p < 0.001), and behavioral intentions (β = 0.24, p < 0.001). Model fit was very good: comparative fit index = 0.95, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.05, and standardized root-mean-square residual = 0.08.

CONCLUSION

Evaluating mediating variables between an intervention (TeleCARE) and a primary outcome (colonoscopy) contributes to our understanding of underlying mechanisms that lead to health behavior change, thus leading to better informed and designed future interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01274143.

The Role of Physician Recommendation in Colorectal Cancer Screening Receipt Among Immigrant Chinese Americans

Chinese Americans have low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. It is unclear whether physicians should offer all CRC screening modalities (fecal occult blood test [FOBT], sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy) to Chinese Americans to increase screening. Seven hundred and twenty-five Chinese Americans were asked in a survey if their physician had ever recommended CRC screening and to self-report receipt and type of CRC screening. Participants whose physician had recommended all CRC screening modalities were significantly more likely to report ever having screening (adjusted odds ratio 4.29, 95% CI 1.26-14.68) and being up-to-date (4.06, 95% CI 2.13-7.74) than those who reported that their physician only recommended FOBT. Participants who received a recommendation of only one type of screening did not report a significant difference in ever having or being up-to-date for screening. A potential strategy to increase CRC screening among Chinese Americans is for clinicians to recommend all available CRC screening modalities to each patient.

Barriers and Facilitators to Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Rural Women in Community Clinics by Heath Literacy

BACKGROUND

Rural women lag rural men and urban women in colon cancer (CRC) screening completion.

OBJECTIVE

To identify rural female patients' knowledge, beliefs barriers, self-efficacy, prior recommendation and completion of CRC screening using an FOBT and to compare these factors by health literacy (HL) level.

METHODS

This descriptive study was conducted between 2015 and 2016 in 4 rural community clinics in south Louisiana. Patients overdue for screening were given a structured interview by a research assistant.

RESULTS

339 women were enrolled, mean age 58.5, 32% had limited HL, 66% were African American. Most (91.7%) had heard of CRC, yet only 71% knew of any CRC screening tests. Women with adequate HL had greater knowledge of specific tests than those with limited HL (78.4% vs 56.6%, p<0.001). Only 25.7% had been given information on CRC testing; those with adequate HL were more likely to have received information (30.1% vs 16.8%; p=0.017). Most women (93.2%) indicated they would want to know if they had CRC, while 72.2% reported a provider had recommended CRC screening. Only 24.9% said a healthcare provider had ever given them an FOBT or that they had ever completed an FOBT (22.7%). There were no differences in women's report of recommendation or completion by HL level.Self-efficacy for completing an FOBT was high; over 90% indicated they could get an FOBT, complete it and mail results to the lab. Level of confidence did not vary by literacy. Three of the four barrier items varied by HL with women with low HL being more likely to fear doing an FOBT because they thought FOBT instructions would be confusing (p=0.002), doing the test would be embarrassing (p=0.025) or messy (p=0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

Rural women are receptive to CRC screening and view FOBTs as effective. Rural community clinics need to provide low cost FOBTs with literacy, gender and culturally appropriate information.

The Association Between Primary Source of Healthcare Coverage and Colorectal Cancer Screening Among US Veterans

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a deadly but largely preventable disease. Screening improves outcomes, but screening rates vary across healthcare coverage models. In the Veterans Health Administration (VA), screening rates are high; however, it is unknown how CRC screening rates compare for Veterans with other types of healthcare coverage.

AIMS

To determine whether Veterans with Veteran-status-related coverage (VA, military, TRICARE) have higher rates of CRC screening than Veterans with alternate sources of healthcare coverage.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of Veterans 50-75 years from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. We examined CRC screening rates and screening modalities. We performed multivariable logistic regression to identify the role of coverage type, demographics, and clinical factors on screening status.

RESULTS

The cohort included 22,138 Veterans. Of these, 76.7% reported up-to-date screening. Colonoscopy was the most common screening modality (83.7%). Screening rates were highest among Veterans with Veteran-status-related coverage (82.3%), as was stool-based screening (10.8%). The adjusted odds of up-to-date screening among Veterans with Veteran-status-related coverage were 83% higher than among Veterans with private coverage (adjusted OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.52-2.22). Additional predictors of screening included older age, black race, high income, access to medical care, frequent medical visits, and employed or married status.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC screening rates were highest among Veterans with Veteran-status-related coverage. High CRC screening rates among US Veterans may be related to system-level characteristics of VA and military care. Insight to these system-level characteristics may inform mechanisms to improve CRC screening in non-VA settings.

Estimating an area-level socioeconomic status index and its association with colonoscopy screening adherence

Socioeconomic status (SES) is often considered a risk factor for health outcomes. SES is typically measured using individual variables of educational attainment, income, housing, and employment variables or a composite of these variables. Approaches to building the composite variable include using equal weights for each variable or estimating the weights with principal components analysis or factor analysis. However, these methods do not consider the relationship between the outcome and the SES variables when constructing the index. In this project, we used weighted quantile sum (WQS) regression to estimate an area-level SES index and its effect in a model of colonoscopy screening adherence in the Minnesota–Wisconsin Metropolitan Statistical Area. We considered several specifications of the SES index including using different spatial scales (e.g., census block group-level, tract-level) for the SES variables. We found a significant positive association (odds ratio = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.15–1.19) between the SES index and colonoscopy adherence in the best fitting model. The model with the best goodness-of-fit included a multi-scale SES index with 10 variables at the block group-level and one at the tract-level, with home ownership, race, and income among the most important variables. Contrary to previous index construction, our results were not consistent with an assumption of equal importance of variables in the SES index when explaining colonoscopy screening adherence. Our approach is applicable in any study where an SES index is considered as a variable in a regression model and the weights for the SES variables are not known in advance.

Physician-Patient Communication is Associated With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Chronic Liver Disease Patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic liver disease are at high risk for developing liver cancer. Factors associated with screening awareness and doctor-patient communication regarding liver cancer were examined.

STUDY

Four hundred sixty-seven patients with chronic liver disease at a tertiary-care clinic participated in a phone survey regarding awareness of cancer screening, doctor-patient communication, and health behaviors. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for data on liver disease etiology and dates of liver imaging tests.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine percent of patients reported awareness of liver cancer screening, and 50% reported talking to their doctor about liver cancer. Patients with higher education, abstinence from alcohol, and liver cirrhosis were more likely to be aware of liver cancer screening (P=0.06, 0.005, <0.0001). Whites, patients with higher education, and those with cirrhosis were more likely to talk to their doctor about liver cancer (P=0.006; P=0.09, <0.0001). Awareness of liver cancer screening (79%) was similar to that of colorectal cancer screening (85%), lower than breast cancer screening (91%), and higher than prostate cancer screening (66%). Patients who were aware of liver cancer screening and reported talking to their doctor about liver cancer were significantly more likely to receive consistent liver surveillance (odds ratio, 4.81; 95% confidence interval, 2.62-8.84 and odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-3.28, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates the importance of effective physician communication with chronic liver disease patients on the risks of developing liver cancer and the importance of regular screening, especially among nonwhites and patients with lower education.

Case-control study of candidate gene methylation and adenomatous polyp formation

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common and preventable forms of cancer but remains the second leading cause of cancer-related death. Colorectal adenomas are precursor lesions that develop in 70-90 % of CRC cases. Identification of peripheral biomarkers for adenomas would help to enhance screening efforts. This exploratory study examined the methylation status of 20 candidate markers in peripheral blood leukocytes and their association with adenoma formation.

METHODS

Patients recruited from a local endoscopy clinic provided informed consent and completed an interview to ascertain demographic, lifestyle, and adenoma risk factors. Cases were individuals with a histopathologically confirmed adenoma, and controls included patients with a normal colonoscopy or those with histopathological findings not requiring heightened surveillance (normal biopsy, hyperplastic polyp). Methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction was used to characterize candidate gene promoter methylation. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using unconditional multivariable logistic regression to test the hypothesis that candidate gene methylation differed between cases and controls, after adjustment for confounders.

RESULTS

Complete data were available for 107 participants; 36 % had adenomas (men 40 %, women 31 %). Hypomethylation of the MINT1 locus (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.0-28.2) and the PER1 (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-7.7) and PER3 (OR 11.6, 95% CI 1.6-78.5) clock gene promoters was more common among adenoma cases. While specificity was moderate to high for the three markers (71-97 %), sensitivity was relatively low (18-45 %).

CONCLUSION

Follow-up of these epigenetic markers is suggested to further evaluate their utility for adenoma screening or surveillance.

Colon Cancer among Older Saudis: Awareness of Risk Factors and Early Signs, and Perceived Barriers to Screening

BACKGROUND

Colon cancer screening (CRCS) uptake is markedly affected by public awareness of the disease. This study was conducted to assess levels of knowledge of CRC, to explore the pattern of CRCS uptake and identify possible barriers to screening among Saudis older than 50 years of age and primary care providers (PCPs) in Al Hassa region, Saudi Arabia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in randomly selected primary health care (PHC) centers, 884 Saudis and 39 PCPs being enrolled for data collection. Structured interviews were conducted to obtain information regarding socio-demographic characteristics, personal information relevant to CRC, awareness about early signs/symptoms and risk factors, and barriers to CRCS. Also, a self- administered data collection form was used to assess barriers to CRCS from the physicians' perspectives.

RESULTS

More than 66% of participants were lacking knowledge about CRC. Participants with higher educational levels, having ever heard about CRC, and having relatives with CRC had a significantly higher awareness of the disease. The rate of reported CRCS was low (8.6%). After conducting a logistic regression analysis, it was observed that female gender (OR=0.28; 95% CI=0.14-0.57; P=0.001), being unmarried (OR=0.11; 95% CI=0.10-0.23; P=0.001), lower levels of education (OR=0.36; 95% CI=0.16-0.82; P=0.015), and having no relatives with CRC (OR=0.30; 95% CI=0.17-0.56; P=0.001) were significantly associated with a lower CRCS uptake. There was a significant difference between most of the perceived barriers to CRCS and gender. Exploratory factor analysis showed that personal fear (especially fear of the screening results and shyness) was the major factor that hindered CRCS with high loading Eigen value of 2.951, explaining 34.8% of the barriers of the included sample toward utilization of CRCS, followed by lack of awareness of both person and providers (high Eigen value of 2.132, and explaining 23.7% of the barriers). The most frequently cited barriers to CRCS from the physicians' perspectives were lack of public awareness, lack of symptoms and signs, and fear of painful procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor levels of knowledge about CRC were found among older Saudis attending PHC centers in Al Hassa, Saudi Arabia. It is crucial to implement an organized national screening program in Saudi Arabia to increase public awareness.

Race/Ethnicity and Adoption of a Population Health Management Approach to Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Community-Based Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Screening outreach programs using population health management principles offer services uniformly to all eligible persons, but racial/ethnic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening patterns in such programs are not well known.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between race/ethnicity and the receipt of CRC screening and timely follow-up of positive results before and after implementation of a screening program.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of screen-eligible individuals at the Kaiser Permanente Northern California community-based integrated healthcare delivery system (2004-2013).

SUBJECTS

A total of 868,934 screen-eligible individuals 51-74 years of age at cohort entry, which included 662,872 persons in the period before program implementation (2004-2006), 654,633 during the first 3 years after implementation (2007-2009), and 665,268 in the period from 4 to 7 years (2010-2013) after program implementation.

INTERVENTION

A comprehensive system-wide long-term effort to increase CRC that included leadership alignment, goal-setting, and quality assurance through a PHM approach, using mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) along with offering screening at office visits.

MAIN MEASURES

Differences over time and by race/ethnicity in up-to-date CRC screening (overall and by test type) and timely follow-up of a positive screen. Race/ethnicity categories included non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American, and multiple races.

KEY RESULTS

From 2004 to 2013, age/sex-adjusted CRC screening rates increased in all groups, including 35.2 to 81.1 % among whites and 35.6 to 78.0 % among blacks. Screening rates among Hispanics (33.1 to 78.3 %) and Native Americans (29.4 to 74.5 %) remained lower than those for whites both before and after program implementation. Blacks, who had slightly higher rates before program implementation (adjusted rate ratio [RR] = 1.04, 99 % CI: 1.02-1.05), had lower rates after program implementation (RR for period from 4 to 7 years = 0.97, 99 % CI: 0.96-0.97). There were also substantial improvements in timely follow-up of positive screening results.

CONCLUSIONS

In this screening program using core PHM principles, CRC screening increased markedly in all racial/ethnic groups, but disparities persisted for some groups and developed in others, which correlated with levels of adoption of mailed FIT.

Acute care surgery: trauma, critical care, emergency general surgery … and preventative health?

BACKGROUND

Acute care surgeons (ACS) often care for patients with limited access to health care. They may not participate in preventative screenings and interventions (PSIs) such as mammography, colonoscopy, or pneumococcal vaccinations (VAs). We sought to identify barriers to compliance and determine if ACS have an opportunity to facilitate PSI participation.

METHODS

All patients evaluated by an ACS were considered for inclusion in the study. Patients meeting national PSI inclusion criteria were enrolled. Surveys were administered to assess compliance and identify barriers to participation.

RESULTS

The overall compliance rate with PSIs was 57%. Patients without a primary care physician had a compliance rate of 23%. The most common barrier to participation was lack of knowledge of PSI recommendations (42%). Males were less compliant than females (47% vs 62%).

CONCLUSIONS

ACS evaluate a large number of general surgery and trauma patients. The acute care surgeon-patient encounter represents a valuable opportunity for education and improved PSI compliance. Additional research should focus on developing interventional strategies and evaluating their impact on patient outcomes.

Trends in colorectal cancer screening over time for persons with and without chronic disability

BACKGROUND

Persons with disabilities have often experienced disparities in routine cancer screening. However, with civil rights protections from the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, such disparities may diminish over time.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether disability disparities exist for colorectal cancer screening and whether these screening patterns have changed over time.

METHODS

We analyzed National Health Interview Survey responses from civilian, non-institutionalized U.S. residents 50-75 years old from selected years between 1998 and 2010. We specified 7 chronic disability indicators using self-reported functional impairments, activity/participation limitations, and expected duration. Separately for women and men, we conducted bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses examining associations of self-reported colorectal cancer screening services with sociodemographic factors and disability type.

RESULTS

Patterns of chronic disability differed somewhat between women and men; disability rates generally rose over time. For both women and men, colorectal cancer screening rates increased substantially from 1998 through 2010. Over time, relatively few statistically significant differences were reported in colorectal cancer screening rates between nondisabled persons and individuals with various disabilities. In 2010, reported screening rates were generally comparable between nondisabled and disabled persons. In the few statistically significant differences, persons with disabilities almost always reported higher colorectal cancer screening rates than nondisabled individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

According to national survey data, reported use of colorectal cancer screening is similar between nondisabled persons and individuals with a variety of different disability types. Despite physical demands of some colorectal cancer screening tests, disparities do not appear between populations with and without disability.

Relationship between Salt Preference and Gastric Cancer Screening: An Analysis of a Nationwide Survey in Korea

Purpose

Epidemiological studies have demonstrated an association between excessive salt intake and gastric cancer risk, and this potential risk increases the need for adequate gastric cancer screening in individuals with high salt intake. However, the association between salt intake and gastric cancer screening in the general population has rarely been investigated. We explored the association between salt preference and participation in gastric cancer screening among a nationally representative Korean population.

Materials and Methods

The study population was derived from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey (KNCSS) 2006-2007, an annual nationwide interview survey investigating cancer screening rates. Of 4,055 individuals who participated in the KNCSS 2006-2007, 3,336 individuals aged over 40 years were included in our analysis. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using polytomous logistic regression.

Results

Individuals with higher salt preference were less likely to participate in regular gastric cancer screening. After adjusting for age, sex, monthly household income, education, family history of cancer, and self-rated health status, ORs for undergoing regular gastric cancer screening were 1.00, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.12), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.54 to 1.00), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.05), and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.92) according to the level of salt preference (p for trend=0.048).

Conclusion

Individuals with higher salt preference showed suboptimal gastric cancer screening adherence compared to those with a lower salt preference. These findings highlight the need for better delivery of educational messages to change risk perceptions regarding gastric cancer screening practice.

Barriers for Compliance to Breast, Colorectal, and Cervical Screening Cancer Tests among Hispanic Patients

Hispanics are less likely to undergo screening tests for colorectal cancer and cervical cancer than non-Hispanic whites. Compliance with mammography, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), colonoscopy, and cervical smears (PAP) and barriers for compliance were studied. A descriptive study was performed with 194 ambulatory patients while they attended routine medical visits. Women are more likely than men to undergo a colonoscopy. Conversely, FOBT was most likely reported by men. Reasons for compliance with FOBT differed by gender. Men were most likely to avoid FOBT due to lack of knowledge whereas women reported that physicians do not recommend the procedure. Both men and women reported that lack of physician's recommendation was their primary reason for not undergoing a colonoscopy. Men tend to report lack of knowledge about colonoscopy procedure. A higher mammogram utilization rate was reported by women older than 40 years. PAP smears were reported by 74% of women older than 21 years. The major reasons for avoiding mammography and PAP tests were having a busy schedule, fear, and feeling uncomfortable during the procedure. In a multivariate regression analysis, occupational status was found to be a predictor for compliance with FOBT and colonoscopy.

Differences in Colorectal Cancer Risk Knowledge Among Alabamians: Screening Implications

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To explore differences in cancer risk knowledge and colorectal cancer (CRC) knowledge among adults in Alabama. 
.

RESEARCH APPROACH

Telephone interviews were conducted using an 80-item questionnaire that included 14 demographic questions and 26 general questions regarding healthcare quality, sources of health-related information, and cancer fears and risk factors. Also included were 40 questions dealing with CRC perceptions and experiences (asked only of respondents aged 50 years or older).
.

SETTING

A standard random-digit-dialed statewide telephone survey, targeting adult residents of Alabama. Interviews were conducted during about seven weeks in 2012. 
.

PARTICIPANTS

1,024 participants, including 615 who were aged 50 years or older. Most of the participants identified as Caucasian.
.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

A secondary data analysis using data from a CRC screening survey of Alabama residents conducted in 2012 by the University of South Alabama polling group via telephone.
.

FINDINGS

Knowledge of general cancer risk factors predicted disagreement with the statement, "There is nothing you can do to avoid getting cancer," and disagreement with the statement, "Only people with signs or symptoms should be screened for CRC." Binary logistic regression showed that those higher in CRC risk knowledge were more likely to have been screened for CRC. 
.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of general cancer risk factors may increase self-efficacy. In addition, individuals with increased knowledge of colorectal cancer risk factors were more likely to participate in CRC screening. 
.

INTERPRETATION

Nurses play an instrumental role in addressing CRC, a preventable and treatable cancer. An opportunity exists for nurses and other healthcare providers to develop culturally appropriate educational interventions to increase knowledge related to CRC, risk factors, and screening, particularly among those who are at increased risk. This education needs to occur in clinical practice and within the community.

Is Travel Time to Colonoscopy Associated With Late-Stage Colorectal Cancer Among Medicare Beneficiaries in Iowa?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to decrease the incidence of late-stage colorectal cancer, yet a substantial proportion of Americans do not receive screening. Those in rural areas may face barriers to colonoscopy services based on travel time, and previous studies have demonstrated lower screening among rural residents. Our purpose was to assess factors associated with late-stage CRC, and specifically to determine if longer travel time to colonoscopy was associated with late-stage CRC among an insured population in Iowa.

METHODS

SEER-Medicare data were used to identify individuals ages 65 to 84 years old diagnosed with CRC in Iowa from 2002 to 2009. The distance between the centroid of the ZIP code of residence and the ZIP code of colonoscopy was computed for each individual who had continuous Medicare fee-for-service coverage for a 3- to 4-month period prior to diagnosis, and a professional claim for colonoscopy within that time frame. Demographic characteristics and travel times were compared between those diagnosed with early- versus late-stage CRC. Also, demographic differences between those who had colonoscopy claims identified within 3-4 months prior to diagnosis (81%) were compared to patients with no colonoscopy claims identified (19%).

RESULTS

A total of 5,792 subjects met inclusion criteria; 31% were diagnosed with early-stage versus 69% with late-stage CRC. Those divorced or widowed (vs married) were more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage CRC (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.06-1.37). Travel time was not associated with diagnosis of late-stage CRC.

DISCUSSION

Among a Medicare-insured population, there was no relationship between travel time to colonoscopy and disease stage at diagnosis. It is likely that factors other than distance to colonoscopy present more pertinent barriers to screening in this insured population. Additional research should be done to determine reasons for nonadherence to screening among those with access to CRC screening services, given that over two-thirds of these insured individuals were diagnosed with late-stage CRC.

Racial minorities are more likely than whites to report lack of provider recommendation for colon cancer screening

OBJECTIVES

Although screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is recommended for all adults aged 50 to 75 years in the United States, there are racial and ethnic disparities in who receives screening. Individuals lacking appropriate CRC screening cite various reasons for nonadherence, including lack of provider recommendation for screening. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the association between patient race and lack of provider recommendation for CRC screening as the primary reason for screening nonadherence.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional observational study of individuals aged 50 to 75 years from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey who reported nonadherence to 2008 United States Preventive Service Task Force CRC screening guidelines. The outcome was self-report that the main reason for not undergoing CRC screening was lack of a physician recommendation ("non-recommendation") for screening. We performed logistic regression to determine significant predictors of non-recommendation, with particular attention to the role of race.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 5,793 unscreened subjects. Of the subjects, 19.1% reported that lack of a provider recommendation was the main reason for CRC nonscreening. African Americans (adjusted odds ratio (adj. OR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-2.05) and English-speaking Asians (adj. OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.24-2.20) were more likely than whites to report physician non-recommendation as the main reason for lack of screening. Asian non-English speakers, however, were less likely to report physician non-recommendation (adj. OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.91).

CONCLUSION

Racial minorities are less likely than whites to receive a physician recommendation for CRC screening. Future research should evaluate why race appears to influence provider recommendations to pursue CRC screening; this is an important step to reduce disparities in CRC screening and lessen the burden of CRC in the United States.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The influence of physician recommendation on prostate-specific antigen screening

PURPOSE

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is controversial, and little is known regarding a physician's effect on a patient's decision to undergo screening. This study's objective was to evaluate the effect of a patient's understanding of the risks and benefits of screening compared to the final recommendation of the provider on the patient's decision to undergo PSA screening.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, men older than 55 years who did not have a history of prostate cancer/prostate "problem" and who reported a PSA test within the preceding year were considered to have undergone screening. The percentages of men informed and not informed of the risks and benefits of screening and the percentage men receiving recommendations for PSA screening from their provider were reported. Multivariable complex-sample logistic regression calculated the odds of undergoing screening.

RESULTS

In all, 75% of men were informed of screening benefits; however, 32% were informed of screening risks. After being informed of both, 56% of men opted for PSA screening if the provider recommended it, compared with only 21% when not recommended. Men receiving a recommendation to undergo PSA testing had higher odds of undergoing screening (odds ratio [OR] = 4.98, 95% CI: 4.53-5.48) compared with those who were only informed about screening benefits (OR = 2.40, 95% CI: 2.18-2.65) or risks (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-0.98). Significant limitations include recall and nonresponse bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' decision to undergo or forgo PSA screening is heavily influenced by the recommendation of their physician; it is imperative that physicians are cognizant of their biases and facilitate a shared decision-making process.

Colorectal Cancer Identification Methods Among Kansas Medicare Beneficiaries, 2008-2010

Introduction

Population-based data are limited on how often colorectal cancer (CRC) is identified through screening or surveillance in asymptomatic patients versus diagnostic workup for symptoms. We developed a process for assessing CRC identification methods among Medicare-linked CRC cases from a population-based cancer registry to assess identification methods (screening/surveillance or diagnostic) among Kansas Medicare beneficiaries.

Methods

New CRC cases diagnosed from 2008 through 2010 were identified from the Kansas Cancer Registry and matched to Medicare enrollment and claims files. CRC cases were classified as diagnostic-identified versus screening/surveillance-identified using a claims-based algorithm for determining CRC test indication. Factors associated with screening/surveillance-identified CRC were analyzed using logistic regression.

Results

Nineteen percent of CRC cases among Kansas Medicare beneficiaries were screening/surveillance-identified while 81% were diagnostic-identified. Younger age at diagnosis (65 to 74 years) was the only factor associated with having screening/surveillance-identified CRC in multivariable analysis. No association between rural/urban residence and identification method was noted.

Conclusion

Combining administrative claims data with population-based registry records can offer novel insights into patterns of CRC test use and identification methods among people diagnosed with CRC. These techniques could also be extended to other screen-detectable cancers.

Elimination of cost-sharing and receipt of screening for colorectal and breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the cost-sharing provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was to reduce financial barriers for preventive services, including screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and breast cancer (BC) among privately and Medicare-insured individuals. Whether the provision has affected CRC and BC screening prevalence is unknown. The current study investigated whether CRC and BC screening prevalence among privately and Medicare-insured adults by socioeconomic status (SES) changed before and after the ACA.

METHODS

Data obtained from the National Health Interview Survey pertaining to privately and Medicare-insured adults from 2008 (before the ACA) and 2013 (after the ACA) were used. There were 15,786 adults aged 50 to 75 years in the CRC screening analysis and 14,530 women aged ≥40 years in the BC screening analysis. Changes in guideline-recommended screening between 2008 and 2013 by SES were expressed as the prevalence difference (PD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) adjusted for demographics, insurance, income, education, body mass index, and having a usual provider.

RESULTS

Overall, CRC screening prevalence increased from 57.3% to 61.2% between 2008 and 2013 (P<.001). Adjusted CRC screening prevalence during the corresponding period increased in low-income (PD, 5.9; 95% CI, 1.8 to 10.2), least-educated (PD, 7.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 13.5), and Medicare-insured (PD, 6.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 10.7) individuals, but not in high-income, most-educated, and privately insured respondents. BC screening remained unchanged overall (70.5% in 2008 vs 70.2% in 2013) and in the low SES groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Increases in CRC screening prevalence between 2008 and 2013 were confined to respondents with low SES. These findings may in part reflect the ACA's removal of financial barriers.

Assessment of Jordanian Patient's Colorectal Cancer Awareness and Preferences towards CRC Screening: Are Jordanians Ready to Embrace CRC Screening?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC is increasingly becoming a major cause of cancer morbidity and mortality in Jordan. However the population's level of awareness about CRC, CRC screening test preferences and willingness to embrace screening are not known. The aim of this study was to assess the level of CRC awareness and screening preferences among Jordanian patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey assessing the CRC knowledge levels was distributed among patients attending outpatient gastroenterology clinics in public hospitals throughout Jordan. A total of 800 surveys were distributed and of these 713 (89.1%) were returned.

RESULTS

Only 22% of the participants correctly judged CRC among the choices provided as the commonest cause of cancer related deaths. The majority of participants (68.3%) underestimated their risk for CRC. Only 26.8% correctly judged their life time risk while 5% overestimated their risk. Two thirds of participants (66%) were willing to pay 500 Jordanian Dinars (equivalent to 706 US$) in order to get a prompt colonoscopy if recommended by their physician, while 25.5% reported that they would rather wait for 6 months in order to get a free colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the participants tended to underestimate their risk for CRC, they were mostly aware of CRC as a major cause of mortality and were willing to embrace the concept of CRC screening and bear the related financial costs. These findings about CRC awareness and propensity for screening provide a good foundation as the Jordanian health system moves forward with initiatives to promote CRC screening and prevention.

Pathways to colonoscopy in the South: seeds of health disparities

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to highlight sociodemographic differences in how patients access colonoscopy.

METHODS

We invited all eligible patients (n = 2500) from 2 academy-affiliated colonoscopy centers in Alachua County, Florida (1 free standing, 1 hospital based), to participate in a precolonoscopy survey (September 2011-October 2013); patients agreeing to participate (n = 1841, response rate = 73.6%) received a $5.00 gift card.

RESULTS

We found sociodemographic differences in referral pathway, costs, and reasons associated with obtaining the procedure. Patients with the ideal pathway (referred by their regular doctor for age-appropriate screening) were more likely to be Black (compared with other minorities), male, high income, employed, and older. Having the colonoscopy because of symptoms was associated with being female, younger, and having lower income. We found significant differences for 1 previously underestimated barrier, having a spouse to accompany the patient to the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' facilitators and barriers to colonoscopy differed by sociodemographics in our study, which implies that interventions based on a single facilitator will not be effective for all subgroups of a population.

Lessons from Medicare coverage of colonoscopy and prostate-specific antigen test

Under the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, Medicare expanded coverage of colonoscopy and prostate-specific antigen tests from diagnostic and surveillance tests to preventive screenings. The preventive tests now are covered with no deductibles or copayments. Reducing out-of-pocket costs increases premiums, resulting in a subsidy to beneficiaries who use the service by nonusers, and by taxpayers who shoulder the bulk of Medicare's costs. Using Medicare fee-for-service claims and the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, we estimate the behavioral and financial consequences of these Balanced Budget Act coverage expansions. We find that fee-for-service Medicare-covered colonoscopies increased by 3.5 percentage points after the coverage expansion, and prostate-specific antigen tests increased by 6.8 percentage points. Beneficiaries with lower incomes, less education, and those lacking a usual source of care or supplemental insurance were less likely to use these tests. Therefore, they generally received much smaller net benefits from the coverage of colonoscopies than more advantaged beneficiaries.

Increasing colorectal cancer screening in an overdue population: participation and cost impacts of adding telephone calls to a FIT mailing program

Many people who live in rural areas face distance barriers to colonoscopy. Our previous study demonstrated the utility of mailing fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) to average risk patients overdue for colorectal cancer (CRC screening). The aims of this study were to determine if introductory and reminder telephone calls would increase the proportion of returned FITs as well as to compare costs. Average risk patients overdue for CRC screening received a high intensity intervention (HII), which included an introductory telephone call to see if they were interested in taking a FIT prior to mailing the test out and reminder phone calls if the FIT was not returned. This HII group was compared to our previous low intensity intervention (LII) where a FIT was mailed to a similar group of veterans with no telephone contact. While a higher proportion of eligible respondents returned FITs in the LII (92 vs. 45 %), there was a much higher proportion of FITs returned out of those mailed in the HII (85 vs. 14 %). The fewer wasted FITs in the HII led to it having lower cost per FIT returned ($27.43 vs. $44.86). Given that either intervention is a feasible approach for patients overdue for CRC screening, health care providers should consider offering FITs using a home-based mailing program along with other evidence-based CRC screening options to average risk patients. Factors such as location, patient population, FIT cost and reimbursement, and personnel costs need to be considered when deciding the most effective way to implement FIT screening.

Personalizing colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review of models to predict risk of colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A valid risk prediction model for colorectal neoplasia would allow patients to be screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) on the basis of risk. We performed a systematic review of studies reporting risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1990 through March 2013 and of references in identified studies. Case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies that developed or attempted to validate a model to predict risk of colorectal neoplasia were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed model quality. Model quality was considered to be good for studies that included external validation, fair for studies that included internal validation, and poor for studies with neither.

RESULTS

Nine studies developed a new prediction model, and 2 tested existing models. The models varied with regard to population, predictors, risk tiers, outcomes (CRC or advanced neoplasia), and range of predicted risk. Several included age, sex, smoking, a measure of obesity, and/or family history of CRC among the predictors. Quality was good for 6 models, fair for 2 models, and poor for 1 model. The tier with the largest population fraction (low, intermediate, or high risk) depended on the model. For most models that defined risk tiers, the risk difference between the highest and lowest tier ranged from 2-fold to 4-fold. Two models reached the 0.70 threshold for the C statistic, typically considered to indicate good discriminatory power.

CONCLUSIONS

Most current colorectal neoplasia risk prediction models have relatively weak discriminatory power and have not demonstrated generalizability. It remains to be determined how risk prediction models could inform CRC screening strategies.