1
|
Weaver SJ, Breslau ES, Russell LE, Zhang A, Sharma R, Bass EB, Marsteller JA, Snyder C. Health-care organization characteristics in cancer care delivery: an integrated conceptual framework with content validation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2024; 116:800-811. [PMID: 38419574 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djae048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Context can influence cancer-related outcomes. For example, health-care organization characteristics, including ownership, leadership, and culture, can affect care access, communication, and patient outcomes. Health-care organization characteristics and other contextual factors can also influence whether and how clinical discoveries reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality. Importantly, policy, market, and technology changes are transforming health-care organization design, culture, and operations across the cancer continuum. Consequently, research is essential to examine when, for whom, and how organizational characteristics influence person-level, organization-level, and population-level cancer outcomes. Understanding organizational characteristics-the structures, processes, and other features of entities involved in health care delivery-and their dynamics is an important yet understudied area of care delivery research across the cancer continuum. Research incorporating organizational characteristics is critical to address health inequities, test care delivery models, adapt interventions, and strengthen implementation. The field lacks conceptual grounding, however, to help researchers identify germane organizational characteristics. We propose a framework identifying organizational characteristics relevant for cancer care delivery research based on conceptual work in health services, organizational behavior, and management science and refined using a systematic review and key informant input. The proposed framework is a tool for organizing existing research and enhancing future cancer care delivery research. Following a 2012 Journal of the National Cancer Institute monograph, this work complements National Cancer Institute efforts to stimulate research addressing the relationship between cancer outcomes and contextual factors at the patient, provider, team, delivery organization, community, and health policy levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sallie J Weaver
- Health Systems and Interventions Research Branch, Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control & Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Erica S Breslau
- Health Systems and Interventions Research Branch, Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control & Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Lauren E Russell
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Allen Zhang
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ritu Sharma
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eric B Bass
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jill A Marsteller
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Claire Snyder
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang GX, Mercaldo SF, Cahill JE, Flanagan JM, Lehman CD, Park ER. Missed Screening Mammography Appointments: Patient Sociodemographic Characteristics and Mammography Completion After 1 Year. J Am Coll Radiol 2024:S1546-1440(24)00356-9. [PMID: 38599358 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2024.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2024] [Revised: 03/26/2024] [Accepted: 03/30/2024] [Indexed: 04/12/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Patients who miss screening mammogram appointments without notifying the health care system (no-show) risk care delays. We investigate sociodemographic characteristics of patients who experience screening mammogram no-shows at a community health center and whether and when the missed examinations are completed. METHODS We included patients with screening mammogram appointments at a community health center between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2021. Language, race, ethnicity, insurance type, residential ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) poverty, appointment outcome (no-show, same-day cancelation, completed), and dates of completed screening mammograms after no-show appointments with ≥1-year follow-up were collected. Multivariable analyses were used to assess associations between patient characteristics and appointment outcomes. RESULTS Of 6,159 patients, 12.1% (743 of 6,159) experienced no-shows. The no-show group differed from the completed group by language, race and ethnicity, insurance type, and poverty level (all P < .05). Patients with no-shows more often had: primary language other than English (32.0% [238 of 743] versus 26.7% [1,265 of 4,741]), race and ethnicity other than White non-Hispanic (42.3% [314 of 743] versus 33.6% [1,595 of 4,742]), Medicaid or means-tested insurance (62.0% [461 of 743] versus 34.4% [1,629 of 4,742]), and residential ZCTAs with ≥20% poverty (19.5% [145 of 743] versus 14.1% [670 of 4,742]). Independent predictors of no-shows were Black non-Hispanic race and ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-2.07; P = .007), Medicaid or other means-tested insurance (aOR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.29-3.30; P < .001), and ZCTAs with ≥20% poverty (aOR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.14-2.72; P = .011). At 1-year follow-up, 40.6% (302 of 743) of patients with no-shows had not completed screening mammogram. DISCUSSION Screening mammogram no-shows is a health equity issue in which socio-economically disadvantaged and racially and ethnically minoritized patients are more likely to experience missed appointments and continued delays in screening mammogram completion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary X Wang
- Officer for Community Health and Equity, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Health Promotion and Resiliency Intervention Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Sarah F Mercaldo
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer E Cahill
- Yvonne L. Munn Center for Nursing Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jane M Flanagan
- Yvonne L. Munn Center for Nursing Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department Chairperson, Connell School of Nursing, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
| | - Constance D Lehman
- Co-Director, Breast Imaging Research Center, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Elyse R Park
- Health Promotion and Resiliency Intervention Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Director, Health Promotion and Resiliency Intervention Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Howard DH, Tangka FK, Miller J, Sabatino SA. Variation in State-Level Mammography Use, 2012 and 2020. Public Health Rep 2024; 139:59-65. [PMID: 36927203 PMCID: PMC10905756 DOI: 10.1177/00333549231155876] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/18/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Mammography is a screening tool for early detection of breast cancer. Uptake in screening use in states can be influenced by Medicaid coverage and eligibility policies, public health outreach efforts, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. We described state-specific mammography use in 2020 and changes as compared with 2012. METHODS We estimated the proportion of women aged ≥40 years who reported receiving a mammogram in the past 2 years, by age group, state, and demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, using 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data. We also compared 2020 state estimates with 2012 estimates. RESULTS The proportion of women aged 50-74 years who received a mammogram in the past 2 years was 78.1% (95% CI, 77.4%-78.8%) in 2020. Across measures of socioeconomic status, mammography use was generally lower among women who did not have health insurance (52.0%; 95% CI, 48.3%-55.6%) than among those who did (79.9%; 95% CI, 79.3%-80.6%) and among those who had a usual source of care (49.4%; 95% CI, 46.1%-52.7%) than among those who did not (81.0%; 95% CI, 80.4%-81.7%). Among women aged 50-74 years, mammography use varied across states, from a low of 65.2% (95% CI, 61.4%-69.0%) in Wyoming to a high of 86.1% (95% CI, 83.8%-88.3%) in Massachusetts. Four states had significant increases in mammography use from 2012 to 2020, and 8 states had significant declines. CONCLUSION Mammography use varied widely among states. Use of evidence-based interventions tailored to the needs of local populations and communities may help close gaps in the use of mammography.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David H. Howard
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Winship Cancer Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Florence K.L. Tangka
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Jacqueline Miller
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Susan A. Sabatino
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Djuric O, Venturelli F, Bassi MC, Gorini G, Paci E, Mantellini P, Giorgi Rossi P. Recruitment strategies and interventions to increase participation in lung cancer screening programmes: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e074140. [PMID: 37907293 PMCID: PMC10618983 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Accepted: 10/16/2023] [Indexed: 11/02/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Despite strong evidence for the efficacy of low-radiation dose CT (LDCT) in reducing lung cancer (LC) mortality, implementing LC screening (LCS) programmes remains a challenge. We aim to systematically review the evidence on the strategies used to recruit the adult population at risk of LC to LDCT within LCS programmes and to estimate the effectiveness of interventions identified, used to reach the potentially eligible population, increase participation and informed choice, and ensure equitable access. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This sequential systematic literature review will consist of three steps: (1) a scoping review of existing strategies and organisational models for LCS; (2) selecting papers reporting relevant outcomes (test coverage, screening participation and informed choice) and comparing results among different models; (3) a systematic review of interventions implemented to increase participation in LCS programmes. Each step will follow the methodological guidelines provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Data sources include electronic databases such as Medline (PubMed version), Embase, CINAHL (Ebsco version), Scopus and Cochrane CENTRAL. The search will be limited to studies published from January 2000 to March 2023 in English, Italian, French, Spanish, Serbian and Croatian language. Findings will be synthesised quantitatively and qualitatively as appropriate. Risk of bias assessment will be only applied to studies selected in the second and third steps. The quality of evidence will be summarised for each outcome using the Grading Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Given that this is a review of existing literature, ethics approval is not required. The results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at relevant conferences. The findings of this review will help guide health authorities in organising LCS programmes and developing recommendations, policies, and actions at national and regional levels. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42023408357.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olivera Djuric
- Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
- Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, Centre for Environmental, Nutritional and Genetic Epidemiology (CREAGEN), Public Health Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Francesco Venturelli
- Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Maria Chiara Bassi
- Scientific Library, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Gorini
- Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Governance, Institute for Study, Prevention and network in Oncology (ISPRO), Florence, Italy
| | - Eugenio Paci
- Italian League against Cancer (LILT), Florence, Italy
| | - Paola Mantellini
- Division of Screening, Institute for Study, Prevention and Network in Oncology (ISPRO), Florence, Italy
| | - Paolo Giorgi Rossi
- Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zholmurzayeva R, Ospanova D, Dzhumabekov A, Noso Y, Talkimbayeva N, Aytmanbetova A, Ussebayeva N, Zhorayev T, Fakhradiyev I. Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Modified Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Almaty, Kazakhstan. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2023; 24:3605-3611. [PMID: 37898869 PMCID: PMC10770665 DOI: 10.31557/apjcp.2023.24.10.3605] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/14/2023] [Indexed: 10/30/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, incorporating culturally tailored strategies to increase screening uptake and compliance, in Almaty, Kazakhstan. METHODS A cross-sectional study was conducted in Almaty between 2019-2022, involving 5370 participants aged 50-70 from diverse settings. Participants were assigned to the main (modified method) and comparison (standard method) groups based on the parity of their ID number digits. Variables of interest included demographics, somatic comorbidities, disability degree, and CRC screening results. The modified screening emphasized healthcare prioritization, optimized nursing resources, enhanced accessibility, and preparedness for the second screening stage. RESULTS In the study 2702 patients in the main group (modified method), and 2668 patients in the comparison group (standard method). Comorbidity data showed that the majority of participants in both groups had between 1-10 comorbidities, with an average of 8.2 in the main group and 8.1 in the comparison group. Screening response rates at stage I were higher in the main group, with 82.6% of subjects undergoing screening, compared to 78.9% in the comparison group (χ2=12.12, p=0.001). The response rates were higher among females in both groups, and no significant differences were found across age groups. At stage II, the response rate was again higher in the main group (56.2%) than in the comparison group (47.2%) (χ2=4.217, p=0.040), with no significant differences noted in relation to sex or age. However, the main group showed a higher response rate at stage I among respondents with 6-10 comorbidities (87.1% vs 82.5%, χ2 =7.820, p=0.009). CONCLUSION The study demonstrates that the modified program significantly outperformed the traditional one, achieving higher response rates at both the initial and subsequent stages of screening. These findings emphasize the value of revisiting and refining current CRC screening methods to maximize early detection rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Ildar Fakhradiyev
- S.D. Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Snavely AC, Foley K, Dharod A, Dignan M, Brower H, Wright E, Miller DP. Effectiveness and implementation of mPATH™-CRC: a mobile health system for colorectal cancer screening. Trials 2023; 24:274. [PMID: 37060023 PMCID: PMC10103028 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07273-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 03/23/2023] [Indexed: 04/16/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna C Snavely
- Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
| | - Kristie Foley
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Ajay Dharod
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Mark Dignan
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Holly Brower
- Wake Forest University School of Business, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Elena Wright
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - David P Miller
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Rose DE, Oishi SM, Farmer MM, Bean-Mayberry B, Canelo I, Washington DL, Yano EM. Association Between Availability of Women's Health Services and Women Veterans' Care Experiences. Womens Health Issues 2022; 32:623-632. [PMID: 36115812 DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2022.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2021] [Revised: 07/11/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Few studies have focused on determinants of women's ratings of care experiences in primary care. We assessed associations between availability of women's health services and women veterans' ratings of care experiences. METHODS In a cross-sectional analysis, we linked Fiscal Year 2017 (October 1, 2016, to September 30, 2017) survey data from 126 Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care leaders to 4,254 women veterans' ratings of care from VA's Survey of Health care Experiences of Patients-Patient Centered Medical Home (2017). The dependent variables were ratings of optimal access (appointments, information), care coordination, comprehensiveness (behavioral health assessment), patient-provider communication, and primary care provider. Key independent variables were number of women's health services 1) routinely available all weekday hours (compared with some hours or not available) and 2) available in VA general primary care vs. other arrangements. In multilevel logistic regression models, we adjusted for patient-, facility-, and area-level characteristics. RESULTS A greater number of women's health services routinely available in VA primary care was associated with a higher likelihood of optimal ratings of care coordination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.10), provider communication (AOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.002-1.16), and primary care provider (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13). A greater number of services available in VA primary care was associated with a lower likelihood of optimal ratings for access (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99). CONCLUSION For the most part, routine availability of women's health services in VA primary care clinics enhanced women's health care experiences. These empirical findings offer health care leaders evidence-based approaches for improving women's care experiences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle E Rose
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California.
| | - Sabine M Oishi
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California
| | - Melissa M Farmer
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California
| | - Bevanne Bean-Mayberry
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California; Department of Medicine, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Ismelda Canelo
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California
| | - Donna L Washington
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California; Department of Medicine, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elizabeth M Yano
- VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, Los Angeles, California; Department of Medicine, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California; Department of Health Policy & Management, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Atlas SJ, Tosteson ANA, Burdick TE, Wright A, Breslau ES, Dang TH, Wint AJ, Smith RE, Harris KA, Zhou L, Haas JS. Primary Care Practitioner Perceptions on the Follow-up of Abnormal Cancer Screening Test Results. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2234194. [PMID: 36173627 PMCID: PMC9523497 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.34194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Health care systems focus on delivering routine cancer screening to eligible individuals, yet little is known about the perceptions of primary care practitioners (PCPs) about barriers to timely follow-up of abnormal results. Objective To describe PCP perceptions about factors associated with the follow-up of abnormal breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening test results. Design, Setting, and Participants Survey study of PCPs from 3 primary care practice networks in New England between February and October 2020, prior to participating in a randomized clinical trial to improve follow-up of abnormal cancer screening test results. Participants were physicians and advanced practice clinicians from participating practices. Main Outcomes and Measures Self-reported process, attitudes, knowledge, and satisfaction about the follow-up of abnormal cancer screening test results. Results Overall, 275 (56.7%) PCPs completed the survey (range by site, 34.9%-71.9%) with more female PCPs (61.8% [170 of 275]) and general internists (73.1% [201 of 275]); overall, 28,7% (79 of 275) were aged 40 to 49 years. Most PCPs felt responsible for managing abnormal cancer screening test results with the specific cancer type being the best factor (range, 63.6% [175 of 275] for breast to 81.1% [223 of 275] for lung; P < .001). The PCPs reported limited support for following up on overdue abnormal cancer screening test results. Standard processes such as automated reports, reminder letters, or outreach workers were infrequently reported. Major barriers to follow-up of abnormal cancer screening test results across all cancer types included limited electronic health record tools (range, 28.5% [75 of 263]-36.5%[96 of 263]), whereas 50% of PCPs felt that there were major social barriers to receiving care for abnormal cancer screening test results for colorectal cancer. Fewer than half reported being very satisfied with the process of managing abnormal cancer screening test results, with satisfaction being greatest for breast cancer (46.9% [127 of 271]) and lowest for cervical (21.8% [59 of 271]) and lung cancer (22.4% [60 of 268]). Conclusions and Relevance In this survey study of PCPs, important deficiencies in systems for managing abnormal cancer screening test results were reported. These findings suggest a need for comprehensive organ-agnostic systems to promote timely follow-up of abnormal cancer screening results using a primary care-focused approach across the range of cancer screening tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven J. Atlas
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Anna N. A. Tosteson
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, New Hampshire
- Dartmouth Cancer Center, Dartmouth Health and Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Timothy E. Burdick
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, New Hampshire
- Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Health, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Adam Wright
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Erica S. Breslau
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Tin H. Dang
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Amy J. Wint
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Rebecca E. Smith
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Kimberly A. Harris
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Li Zhou
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer S. Haas
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Barrera Ferro D, Bayer S, Bocanegra L, Brailsford S, Díaz A, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez EV, Smith H. Understanding no-show behaviour for cervical cancer screening appointments among hard-to-reach women in Bogotá, Colombia: A mixed-methods approach. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0271874. [PMID: 35867727 PMCID: PMC9307170 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271874] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 07/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The global burden of cervical cancer remains a concern and higher early mortality rates are associated with poverty and limited health education. However, screening programs continue to face implementation challenges, especially in developing country contexts. In this study, we use a mixed-methods approach to understand the reasons for no-show behaviour for cervical cancer screening appointments among hard-to-reach low-income women in Bogotá, Colombia. In the quantitative phase, individual attendance probabilities are predicted using administrative records from an outreach program (N = 23384) using both LASSO regression and Random Forest methods. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews are analysed to understand patient perspectives (N = 60). Both inductive and deductive coding are used to identify first-order categories and content analysis is facilitated using the Framework method. Quantitative analysis shows that younger patients and those living in zones of poverty are more likely to miss their appointments. Likewise, appointments scheduled on Saturdays, during the school vacation periods or with lead times longer than 10 days have higher no-show risk. Qualitative data shows that patients find it hard to navigate the service delivery process, face barriers accessing the health system and hold negative beliefs about cervical cytology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Barrera Ferro
- Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
- Departamento de Ingeniería Industrial, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
- * E-mail:
| | - Steffen Bayer
- Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Sally Brailsford
- Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Adriana Díaz
- Departamento de Ingeniería Industrial, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
| | | | - Honora Smith
- Mathematical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Organized Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening: Attendance and Determinants in Rural China. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19148237. [PMID: 35886089 PMCID: PMC9318997 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2022] [Revised: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/02/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
To evaluate the attendance and determinants of organized cervical and breast cancer (two-cancer) screening, especially higher-level factors, we conducted a cross-sectional survey in central China from June 2018 to November 2019 among 1949 women (age ≥ 35 years). We examined organizer-level factors, provider-level factors, receiver-lever factors and attendance and participation willingness of screening. The results indicate that the attendance and participation willingness of organized two-cancer screening was 61.19% and 77.15%, respectively. After adjustment for potential confounders, women who received screening notification were more likely to have greater participation willingness and higher attendance than those who received no notification (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27-1.99; aOR = 98.03, 95% CI: 51.44-186.82, respectively). Compared with being notified about screening by GPs, being notified by community women's leaders and other community leaders were more likely to lead to greater willingness to participate again (aOR = 2.86, 95% CI: 1.13-7.24; aOR = 3.27, 95% CI: 1.26-8.48, respectively) and recommending screening to others (aOR = 2.18, 95% CI: 1.02-4.65; aOR = 4.14, 95% CI: 1.84-9.30, respectively). The results suggest that notification of women about screening by community leaders is an important organizer-level factor. As a part of public health services, the design and implementation of optimal cancer screening strategies may require public-sector involvement at the organizer level instead of a one-man show by the health sector.
Collapse
|
11
|
Llorian ER, Mason G. Healthcare utilization and telemedicine: An evaluation using linked administrative data from Manitoba. J Telemed Telecare 2021; 29:282-290. [PMID: 33459121 DOI: 10.1177/1357633x20981227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This research examines utilization patterns for patients using telemedicine compared to those receiving treatment conventionally. Administrative data from 2007-2016 is linked to records from the Manitoba Telehealth programme to conduct a population-level study. METHODS Using a high dimensional propensity-weighted regression model, the study compares four utilization measures between telemedicine users and non-users. These include: ambulatory visits (number of visits to any physician), visits to primary care physicians, visits to specialists and the number of hospitalizations. RESULTS Compared to non-users, telemedicine patients showed a higher number of in-person visits. Specifically, using incidence-rate ratios, telemedicine users had 1.32 more ambulatory visits (p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-1.41), 1.26 more visits to primary care practitioners (p<0.001; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.35), 1.38 more visits to specialists (p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.61) and 1.14 more hospitalizations (p>0.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.43). These results were robust to restricted analyses for distance, regions, and chronic conditions. Those patients with frequent virtual encounters with a specialist showed a decrease of the frequency of in-person visits of the same type of care (incidence-rate ratio=0.48, p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.54). DISCUSSION Patterns in utilization vary between telemedicine users and non-users, with users showing a higher number of in-person visits than non-users, and only frequent users of telemedicine showing reduced in-person visits. Future investigation linking utilization patterns with patient care outcomes and costs will inform healthcare policy and clinical treatment plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabet Rodriguez Llorian
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE), Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gregory Mason
- Department of Economics, University of Manitoba, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Golding H, Webber CE, Groome PA. Factors contributing to time to diagnosis in symptomatic colorectal cancer: A scoping review. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2020; 30:e13397. [PMID: 33377574 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2020] [Revised: 07/11/2020] [Accepted: 10/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide (Ferlay et al., 2015, International Journal of Cancer, 136, E359), and delayed diagnosis is associated with mortality (Tørring et al., 2011, British Journal of Cancer, 104, 934; Tørring et al., 2012, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 65, 669). The purpose of this review was to determine the factors associated with time to diagnosis in symptomatic CRC using scoping review methods. METHODS We performed database and citation searches to identify studies which examine the length of any interval from symptom presentation to diagnosis. Study selection was conducted by two independent reviewers. Factors contributing to time to diagnosis were extracted from selected articles and mapped onto a conceptual framework consisting of four levels: patient and disease factors, provider factors, organisation/setting factors and sectors of influence. RESULTS From the 31 studies included in this review, we identified 138 unique factors, 17 of which were investigated by at least three studies and 11 of which had consistent results. Patient and disease factors were most commonly studied. Patient perception that their symptoms were benign, a non-urgent referral, female sex and rectal tumour location were each associated with a longer time to diagnosis. CONCLUSION Thus far, the literature has focused on patient or disease-related factors, while other levels of influence have been relatively understudied.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haley Golding
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Colleen E Webber
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Patti A Groome
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.,Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Barlow WE, Beaber EF, Geller BM, Kamineni A, Zheng Y, Haas JS, Chao CR, Rutter CM, Zauber AG, Sprague BL, Halm EA, Weaver DL, Chubak J, Doria-Rose VP, Kobrin S, Onega T, Quinn VP, Schapira MM, Tosteson ANA, Corley DA, Skinner CS, Schnall MD, Armstrong K, Wheeler CM, Silverberg MJ, Balasubramanian BA, Doubeni CA, McLerran D, Tiro JA. Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:238-246. [PMID: 31292633 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2018] [Revised: 04/11/2019] [Accepted: 07/03/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer screening is a complex process encompassing risk assessment, the initial screening examination, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment of cancer precursors or early cancers. Metrics that enable comparisons across different screening targets are needed. We present population-based screening metrics for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers for nine sites participating in the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium. METHODS We describe how selected metrics map to a trans-organ conceptual model of the screening process. For each cancer type, we calculated calendar year 2013 metrics for the screen-eligible target population (breast: ages 40-74 years; cervical: ages 21-64 years; colorectal: ages 50-75 years). Metrics for screening participation, timely diagnostic evaluation, and diagnosed cancers in the screened and total populations are presented for the total eligible population and stratified by age group and cancer type. RESULTS The overall screening-eligible populations in 2013 were 305 568 participants for breast, 3 160 128 for cervical, and 2 363 922 for colorectal cancer screening. Being up-to-date for testing was common for all three cancer types: breast (63.5%), cervical (84.6%), and colorectal (77.5%). The percentage of abnormal screens ranged from 10.7% for breast, 4.4% for cervical, and 4.5% for colorectal cancer screening. Abnormal breast screens were followed up diagnostically in almost all (96.8%) cases, and cervical and colorectal were similar (76.2% and 76.3%, respectively). Cancer rates per 1000 screens were 5.66, 0.17, and 1.46 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Comprehensive assessment of metrics by the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium enabled systematic identification of screening process steps in need of improvement. We encourage widespread use of common metrics to allow interventions to be tested across cancer types and health-care settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Elisabeth F Beaber
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Berta M Geller
- Departments of Family Medicine, and the University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Dana Farber, Harvard Cancer Institute, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
| | - Chun R Chao
- Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA
| | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Brian L Sprague
- Departments of Surgery and Radiology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Ethan A Halm
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.,Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Donald L Weaver
- Department of Pathology and the UVM Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Jessica Chubak
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA
| | - V Paul Doria-Rose
- Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA.,Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Sarah Kobrin
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Tracy Onega
- Departments of Biomedical Data Science, Epidemiology, and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH
| | | | - Marilyn M Schapira
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, and CMC VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Anna N A Tosteson
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH
| | - Douglas A Corley
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA
| | - Celette Sugg Skinner
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Mitchell D Schnall
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Katrina Armstrong
- General Medicine Division, MA General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Cosette M Wheeler
- Departments of Pathology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico Health Science Center, Albuquerque, NM.,University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, NM
| | | | - Bijal A Balasubramanian
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,UTHealth School of Public Health, Dallas, TX
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Dale McLerran
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Jasmin A Tiro
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Implementation and Utilization of a "Pink Card" Walk-In Screening Mammography Program Integrated With Physician Visits. J Am Coll Radiol 2020; 17:1602-1608. [PMID: 32739416 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2020] [Revised: 07/04/2020] [Accepted: 07/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation and utilization of the Pink Card program, which links a physician-delivered reminder that a woman is due for screening mammography (SM) during an office visit with the opportunity to undergo walk-in screening. METHODS In 2016, the authors' community-based breast imaging center provided physicians from three primary care and obstetrics and gynecology practices located in the same outpatient facility business card-sized Pink Cards to offer women due for SM during office visits. The card includes a reminder that screening is due and can be used to obtain SM on a walk-in basis. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of women who used Pink Cards among all screened women over 2 years. Independent predictors of Pink Card utilization were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS Among 3,688 women who underwent SM, Pink Cards were used by 19.9% (733 of 3,688). Compared with women with prescheduled screening visits, Pink Card users were more likely to be Asian (odds ratio [OR], 1.37; P =.032), Black (OR, 2.05; P = .002), and Medicaid insured (OR, 1.71; P = .013) and less likely to use English as their primary language (OR, 2.75; P = .003). Additionally, Pink Card users were less likely to be up to date for biennial SM compared with women with prescheduled visits (31.9% [234 of 733] versus 66.6% [1,968 of 2,955], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS The Pink Card walk-in SM program can improve screening access, particularly for racial/ethnic minorities and Medicaid-insured patients. Expansion of this program may help reduce disparities and increase engagement in breast cancer screening.
Collapse
|
15
|
Lee SJ, Hamann HA, Browning T, Santini NO, Abbara S, Balis DS, Chiu H, Moran BA, McGuire M, Gerber DE. Stakeholder engagement to initiate lung cancer screening in an urban safety-net health system. Healthcare (Basel) 2020; 8:100370. [DOI: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2019.100370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2017] [Revised: 07/18/2019] [Accepted: 08/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
|
16
|
Rodriguez SA, Mullen PD, Lopez DM, Savas LS, Fernández ME. Factors associated with adolescent HPV vaccination in the U.S.: A systematic review of reviews and multilevel framework to inform intervention development. Prev Med 2020; 131:105968. [PMID: 31881235 PMCID: PMC7064154 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105968] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2019] [Revised: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 12/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Multilevel factors impact HPV vaccine series initiation and completion among adolescents in the U.S. Synthesis of these factors is needed to inform intervention development and to direct future research. Current frameworks synthesizing factors focus on females only and do not include both series initiation and completion outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of reviews to identify modifiable individual-, provider-, and clinic-level factors associated with HPV vaccination outcomes among U.S. adolescents and developed a multilevel framework illustrating relations between factors to inform intervention development. We searched Medline, PsychInfo, Pubmed, CINAHL, and ERIC databases and included reviews published 2006 to July 2, 2018 describing individual-, provider-, or clinic-level factors quantitatively associated with HPV vaccination among U.S. adolescents. Two coders independently screened reviews, extracted data, and determined quality ratings. Sixteen reviews containing 481 unique primary studies met criteria. Factors synthesized into the multilevel framework included parent psychosocial factors (knowledge, beliefs, outcome expectations, intentions) and behaviors, provider recommendation, and patient-targeted and provider-targeted clinic systems. The scope of our framework and review advances research in two key ways. First, the framework illustrates salient modifiable factors at multiple levels on which to intervene to increase HPV vaccination. Second, the review identified critical gaps in the literature at each level. Future research should link the body of literature on parental intentions to vaccination outcomes, identify provider psychosocial factors associated with recommendation behaviors and subsequent vaccine uptake in their patient population, and understand clinic factors associated with successful implementation of patient- and provider-targeted system-level interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Serena A Rodriguez
- Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
| | - Patricia Dolan Mullen
- Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Diana M Lopez
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Lara S Savas
- Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Maria E Fernández
- Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Coretti S, Ruggeri M, Dibidino R, Gitto L, Marcellusi A, Mennini FS, Cicchetti A. Economic evaluation of colorectal cancer screening programs: Affordability for the health service. J Med Screen 2020; 27:186-193. [PMID: 31948342 DOI: 10.1177/0969141319898732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To estimate the cost-effectiveness of the public colorectal cancer screening program in the Abruzzo region, Italy. METHODS Cost-effectiveness was analysed using a two-armed Markov model comparing: (1) Abruzzo screening program based on biennial faecal immunochemical occult blood testing, with colonoscopy as second level test for individuals with positive results, with (2) Treatment of symptomatic patients according to the stage of the neoplasm. Transition probabilities were adjusted for accuracy of tests and incidence of colorectal cancer. Diagnosis-related groups' charges and field collected data were used to estimate costs. Costs and benefits were discounted by 3.5%. Monte Carlo simulation confirmed the robustness of the model results. RESULTS Assuming a compliance rate of 64.7%, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the current colorectal screening program was €433.06/quality adjusted life year gained, considerably lower than conventional thresholds (around €30,000). CONCLUSION Early detection and intervention programs help to avoid a large number of highly debilitating and expensive cancer treatments. These results show that the screening program currently implemented in Abruzzo should be considered as a good investment in health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Coretti
- Department of Economics and Management "Marco Fanno", University of Padova, Italy
| | - Matteo Ruggeri
- Graduate School of Health Economics and Management (ALTEMS), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome , Italy
| | - Rossella Dibidino
- Graduate School of Health Economics and Management (ALTEMS), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome , Italy
| | - Lara Gitto
- Dipartimento di Economia, Università degli Studi di Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Andrea Marcellusi
- CEIS EEHTA (Economic Evaluation & HTA), University "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | | | - Americo Cicchetti
- Graduate School of Health Economics and Management (ALTEMS), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome , Italy
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Valent F, Sammartano F, Degano S, Dellach C, Franzo A, Gerin D, Gnesutta D, Mentil S, Stel S, Pattitoni C, Gongolo F. Reasons for non-participation in public oncological screening programs in the Italian region Friuli Venezia Giulia. Public Health 2020; 181:80-85. [PMID: 31958673 DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2019.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2019] [Revised: 11/14/2019] [Accepted: 12/06/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In the Italian region Friuli Venezia Giulia, public screening is offered for cervical cancer, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer. Participation of the target population is lower than 70%. Our aim was to investigate reasons for non-participation. STUDY DESIGN This is a qualitative survey. METHODS A telephone survey was conducted in 2018 on a random sample of persons not adhering in 2017. Only one question about the reason for non-participation was asked. The answers were transcribed verbatim with no personal identifiers and no additional information. The transcribed anonymous answers were then read and classified into mutually exclusive macrocategories and subcategories. RESULTS A total of 4456 non-adhering persons were surveyed. Personal practical issues were the most common type of barrier reported in all three screening programs, followed by personal beliefs. Program-related issues were more common in cervical cancer screening than in the others. Almost half of the women not participating in the public breast cancer screening and 40% of those not adhering to the public cervical cancer screening had mammography or Pap test out of the public program. CONCLUSIONS In this region, practitioners should work to overcome practical barriers and discuss personal beliefs. Surveys of non-participants in other geographic areas would be important to adequately inform local policymaking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Valent
- Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Udine, Udine, Italy.
| | - F Sammartano
- Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - S Degano
- Azienda Regionale di Coordinamento per la Salute, Udine, Italy
| | - C Dellach
- Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | - A Franzo
- Direzione Centrale Salute, Integrazione Sociosanitaria, Politiche Sociali e Famiglia, Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Udine, Italy; Azienda per l'Assistenza Sanitaria N. 5, "Friuli Occidentale", Pordenone, Italy
| | - D Gerin
- Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | - D Gnesutta
- Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - S Mentil
- Direzione Centrale Salute, Integrazione Sociosanitaria, Politiche Sociali e Famiglia, Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Udine, Italy; Azienda per l'Assistenza Sanitaria N. 3, "Altro Friuli Collinare Medio Friuli", Gemona del Friuli, Italy
| | - S Stel
- Azienda per l'Assistenza Sanitaria N. 2, "Bassa Friulana Isontina", Palmanova, Italy
| | | | - F Gongolo
- Direzione Centrale Salute, Integrazione Sociosanitaria, Politiche Sociali e Famiglia, Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Udine, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Kaminski MF, Robertson DJ, Senore C, Rex DK. Optimizing the Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening Worldwide. Gastroenterology 2020; 158:404-417. [PMID: 31759062 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.11.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2019] [Revised: 11/04/2019] [Accepted: 11/14/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Screening, followed by colonoscopic polypectomy (or surgery for malignant lesions), prevents incident colorectal cancer and mortality. However, there are variations in effective application of nearly every aspect of the screening process. Screening is a multistep process, and failure in any single step could result in unnecessary morbidity and mortality. Awareness of variations in operator- and system-dependent performance has led to detailed, comprehensive recommendations in the United States and Europe on how colonoscopy screening should be performed and measured. Likewise, guidance has been provided on quality assurance for nonprimary colonoscopy-based screening programs, including strategies to maximize adherence. Quality improvement is now a validated science, and there is clear evidence that higher quality prevents incident cancer and cancer death. Quality must be addressed at the levels of the system, provider, and individuals, to maximize the benefits of screening for any population. We review the important aspects of measuring and improving the quality of colorectal cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael F Kaminski
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, the Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland; Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Oncology, Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland; Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Douglas J Robertson
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and The Dartmouth Institute, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Carlo Senore
- Epidemiology and Screening Unit-CPO, University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Tsui J, Howard J, O'Malley D, Miller WL, Hudson SV, Rubinstein EB, Ferrante JM, Bator A, Crabtree BF. Understanding primary care-oncology relationships within a changing healthcare environment. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2019; 20:164. [PMID: 31775653 PMCID: PMC6882058 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-019-1056-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2019] [Accepted: 11/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Background Management of care transitions from primary care into and out of oncology is critical for optimal care of cancer patients and cancer survivors. There is limited understanding of existing primary care-oncology relationships within the context of the changing health care environment. Methods Through a comparative case study of 14 innovative primary care practices throughout the United States (U.S.), we examined relationships between primary care and oncology settings to identify attributes contributing to strengthened relationships in diverse settings. Field researchers observed practices for 10–12 days, recording fieldnotes and conducting interviews. We created a reduced dataset of all text related to primary care-oncology relationships, and collaboratively identified patterns to characterize these relationships through an inductive “immersion/crystallization” analysis process. Results Nine of the 14 practices discussed having either formal or informal primary care-oncology relationships. Nearly all formal primary care-oncology relationships were embedded within healthcare systems. The majority of private, independent practices had more informal relationships between individual primary care physicians and specific oncologists. Practices with formal relationships noted health system infrastructure that facilitates transfer of patient information and timely referrals. Practices with informal relationships described shared commitment, trust, and rapport with specific oncologists. Regardless of relationship type, challenges reported by primary care settings included lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities during cancer treatment and beyond. Conclusions With the rapid transformation of U.S. healthcare towards system ownership of primary care practices, efforts are needed to integrate strengths of informal primary care-oncology relationships in addition to formal system driven relationships.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Tsui
- Division of Population Science, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany, New Brunswick, NJ, 08903, USA.
| | - Jenna Howard
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - Denalee O'Malley
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - William L Miller
- Lehigh Valley Health Network, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, 1247 S. Cedar Crest Blvd., Allentown, PA, 18103, USA
| | - Shawna V Hudson
- Division of Population Science, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany, New Brunswick, NJ, 08903, USA.,Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - Ellen B Rubinstein
- Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North Dakota State University, 428 Minard Hall, 1210 Albrecht Boulevard, Fargo, ND, USA
| | - Jeanne M Ferrante
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - Alicja Bator
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - Benjamin F Crabtree
- Division of Population Science, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany, New Brunswick, NJ, 08903, USA.,Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 112 Paterson St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Vaisson G, Witteman HO, Chipenda-Dansokho S, Saragosa M, Bouck Z, Bravo CA, Desveaux L, Llovet D, Presseau J, Taljaard M, Umar S, Grimshaw JM, Tinmouth J, Ivers NM. Testing e-mail content to encourage physicians to access an audit and feedback tool: a factorial randomized experiment. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2019; 26:205-216. [PMID: 31285667 DOI: 10.3747/co.26.4829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Background In Ontario, an online audit and feedback tool that provides primary care physicians with detailed information about patients who are overdue for cancer screening is underused. In the present study, we aimed to examine the effect of messages operationalizing 3 behaviour change techniques on access to the audit and feedback tool and on cancer screening rates. Methods During May-September 2017, a pragmatic 2×2×2 factorial experiment tested 3 behaviour change techniques: anticipated regret, material incentive, and problem-solving. Outcomes were assessed using routinely collected administrative data. A qualitative process evaluation explored how and why the e-mail messages did or did not support Screening Activity Report access. Results Of 5449 primary care physicians randomly allocated to 1 of 8 e-mail messages, fewer than half opened the messages and fewer than 1 in 10 clicked through the messages. Messages with problem-solving content were associated with a 12.9% relative reduction in access to the tool (risk ratio: 0.871; 95% confidence interval: 0.791 to 0.958; p = 0.005), but a 0.3% increase in cervical cancer screening (rate ratio: 1.003; 95% confidence interval: 1.001 to 1.006; p = 0.003). If true, that association would represent 7568 more patients being screened. No other significant effects were observed. Conclusions For audit and feedback to work, recipients must engage with the data; for e-mail messages to prompt activity, recipients must open and review the message content. This large factorial experiment demonstrated that small changes in the content of such e-mail messages might influence clinical behaviour. Future research should focus on strategies to make cancer screening more user-centred.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Vaisson
- Quebec: Office of Education and Professional Development, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman, Chipenda-Dansokho), Research Centre of the CHU de Québec, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman), Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Laval University (Witteman), and Laval University Primary Care Research Centre, Laval University, Quebec City (Witteman)
| | - H O Witteman
- Quebec: Office of Education and Professional Development, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman, Chipenda-Dansokho), Research Centre of the CHU de Québec, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman), Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Laval University (Witteman), and Laval University Primary Care Research Centre, Laval University, Quebec City (Witteman)
| | - S Chipenda-Dansokho
- Quebec: Office of Education and Professional Development, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman, Chipenda-Dansokho), Research Centre of the CHU de Québec, Laval University (Vaisson, Witteman), Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Laval University (Witteman), and Laval University Primary Care Research Centre, Laval University, Quebec City (Witteman)
| | - M Saragosa
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - Z Bouck
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - C A Bravo
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - L Desveaux
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - D Llovet
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - J Presseau
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - M Taljaard
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - S Umar
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - J M Grimshaw
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - J Tinmouth
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| | - N M Ivers
- Ontario: Family Practice Health Centre, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Desveaux, Ivers); Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto (Saragosa, Bouck, Desveaux, Ivers); Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto (Bouck); Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto (Bravo, Llovet, Umar, Tinmouth); Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto (Llovet); Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard, Grimshaw); School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau, Taljaard); School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Presseau); Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa (Grimshaw); Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto (Tinmouth); Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Tinmouth); and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto (Ivers)
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gago J, Paolino M, Arrossi S. Factors associated with low adherence to cervical cancer follow-up retest among HPV+/ cytology negative women: a study in programmatic context in a low-income population in Argentina. BMC Cancer 2019; 19:367. [PMID: 31014287 PMCID: PMC6480915 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5583-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2018] [Accepted: 04/05/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cervical Cancer is still a major public health challenge in low and middle-income countries. HPV testing has been an innovative approach, which was introduced in Argentina for women aged 30+ through the Jujuy Demonstration Project (JDP) carried out between 2012 and 2014. After a positive HPV-test, cytology is used as triage method. Under this protocol, the group of women with HPV+ and normal cytology are recommended to repeat the test within 12-18 months. Studies have shown that this group has increased risk of CIN2+, however, assuring high levels of repeating test among these women is difficult to achieve. We analyze those factors associated with lower re-test attendance among HPV+/ cytology negative women at a programmatic level in low-middle income settings. METHODS We used data of women aged 30+ HPV-tested in the JDP and followed until 2018 (n = 49,565). We performed a set of different adjusted logistic regression models. Primary outcomes were re-test attendance and re-test attendance within recommended timeframe. We assessed as covariates age, health insurance status, year of HPV-testing, Pap testing in the past 3 years, HPV-testing modality (clinician-collected (CC) tests/self-collected (SC) tests), and span between HPV-test collection and report of results. RESULTS Forty nine thousand five hundred sixty five women were HPV-tested and 6742 had a positive HPV-test. Among HPV+ women, a total of 4522 were HPV+/Cytology negative (67.1%). In total, 3172 HPV+/Cytology negative women (70.1%) had a record of a second HPV test as of March 2018. Only 1196 women (26%) completed the second test within the timeframe. Women with no record of a previous Pap (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.4-0.53, p < 0.001), aged 64+ (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68, p < 0.001) were less likely to be retested; while women with clinician-collected samples had higher odds of being re-tested (OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.06-1.91, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Low re-test rates were found in HPV +/ normal cytology women. Tailored interventions are needed to increase the effectiveness of the screening in this group, especially for those women with characteristics associated to lower attendance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Gago
- Programa Nacional de Prevención de Cancer Cervicouterino/Instituto Nacional del Cáncer (Argentina), Julio A. Roca 781, Piso 7, Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad/Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Sánchez de Bustamante 27, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Melisa Paolino
- Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad/Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Sánchez de Bustamante 27, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Silvina Arrossi
- Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad/Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Sánchez de Bustamante 27, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Carlos RC, Sicks JD, Chiles C, Gansauer L, Kamen CS, Kazak AE, Neuman HB, Unger JM, Weaver KE. Lung Cancer Screening in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program: Availability and Service Organization. J Am Coll Radiol 2019; 16:427-434. [PMID: 30819455 PMCID: PMC6688499 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.12.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2018] [Accepted: 12/15/2018] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Annual low-dose CT (LDCT) for lung screening in high-risk individuals decreases both lung cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Community oncology practice networks constituting the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) conduct clinical trials across the cancer spectrum. The authors report access to and characteristics of LDCT screening for lung cancer in these community oncology practices. METHODS A landscape capacity assessment was conducted in 2017 across the NCORP network. The primary outcome was the proportion of adult oncology practice groups offering LDCT lung screening on site. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of those screening services (1) with radiologist participation in service management and (2) offered at ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. RESULTS Fifty-two percent of components and subcomponents responded to at least some portion of the assessment, representing 217 practice groups. Analyzing the 211 adult oncology practice groups responding to the primary question, 73% offered lung screening services on site. Radiologists participated in managing 69% of these services. Forty-seven percent were offered in ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. Minority and underserved practice groups were less likely to offer lung screening; however, this association dissipated when analyses focused on practices within the United States. Safety net and Critical Access Hospital designation increased the likelihood of screening availability. CONCLUSIONS The majority of community oncology practice groups within the NCORP offered lung screening on site, although radiologist participation in service management and ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation, markers of service quality, were more variable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth C Carlos
- Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
| | - JoRean D Sicks
- ECOG-ACRIN Biostatistics and Data Management Center, Brown University Center for Statistical Sciences, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - Caroline Chiles
- Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University Health Sciences Center, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
| | - Lucy Gansauer
- Spartanburg Medical Center, Spartanburg, South Carolina
| | - Charles S Kamen
- Cancer Control Unit, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
| | - Anne E Kazak
- Nemours Center for Healthcare Delivery Science, Nemours Children's Health System, Wilmington, Delaware
| | - Heather B Neuman
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Joseph M Unger
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Kathryn E Weaver
- Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Haas CB, Phipps AI, Hajat A, Chubak J, Wernli KJ. Time to fecal immunochemical test completion for colorectal cancer screening. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MANAGED CARE 2019; 25:174-180. [PMID: 30986014 PMCID: PMC7170013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) can efficiently screen for colorectal cancer (CRC), but little is known on the timing to their completion. We investigate the time to return of a FIT following an order and describe patient characteristics associated with FIT return. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. METHODS We identified 63,478 members of Kaiser Permanente Washington, aged 50 to 74 years, who received a FIT order from 2011 through 2012. Patient characteristics were ascertained through administrative and electronic health record data sources. We compared time from FIT order to return by patient characteristics using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. RESULTS About half (53.7%) of members completed a FIT. Median time from order to return was 13 days (mean, 44.5 days; interquartile range, 6-42 days). There was higher completion of FITs among Asian patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.43; 95% CI, 1.38-1.48), black patients (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.19), and Hispanic patients (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) compared with white patients; among patients with recent CRC testing (vs no testing in past 2 years; HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.86-1.95); and among patients with Medicare insurance (vs commercial; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.24-1.37). Factors associated with decreased FIT completion included younger age (50-54 years vs 70-74 years; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.92), obesity (vs normal body mass index; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.91), and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score (≥3 vs 0; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.87). CONCLUSIONS Time to return of FIT varies by patient characteristics. We observed greater FIT completion among people of color, suggesting that racial disparities in CRC may not be due to patient completion of the test after an order is received.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cameron B Haas
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Ste 1600, Seattle, WA 98101.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Musa J, Achenbach CJ, Evans CT, Jordan N, Daru PH, Hou L, Murphy RL, Adewole IF, Simon MA. Association between patient-reported HIV status and provider recommendation for screening in an opportunistic cervical Cancer screening setting in Jos, Nigeria. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:885. [PMID: 30466437 PMCID: PMC6251217 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3700-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2018] [Accepted: 11/08/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cervical cancer screening (CCS) is an important health service intervention for prevention of morbidity and mortality from invasive cervical cancer. The role of provider recommendation and referral is critical in utilization of this services particularly in settings where screening is largely opportunistic. We sought to understand how patient-reported human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection status is associated with provider referral in an opportunistic screening setting. METHODS We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data on a sample of women who had received a CCS at the "Operation Stop" cervical cancer (OSCC) screening service in Jos, Nigeria over a 10-year time period (2006-2016). We used the de-identified records of women who had their first CCS to analyze the association between patient-reported HIV and likelihood of provider-referral at first CCS. We performed descriptive statistics with relevant test of association using Student t-test (t-test) for continuous variables and Pearson chi square or Fisher exact test where applicable for categorical variables. We also used a bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the independent association of patient-reported HIV on provider referral. All statistical tests were performed using STATA version 14.1, College Station, Texas, USA. Level of statistical significance was set at 0.05. RESULTS During the 10-year period, 14,088 women had their first CCS. The reported HIV prevalence in the population was 5.0%; 95% CI: 4.6, 5.4 (703/14,088). The median age of women who were screened was 37 years (IQR; 30-45). Women who were HIV infected received more referrals from providers compared to women who were HIV uninfected (68.7% versus 49.2%), p-value < 0.001. Similarly, we found an independent effect of patient-reported HIV infection on the likelihood for provider-referral in the screened sample (aOR = 2.35; 95% CI: 1.95, 2.82). CONCLUSION Our analysis supports the design of health systems that facilitates providers' engagement and provision of necessary counseling for CCS in the course of routine clinical care. The practice of offering recommendation and referrals for CCS to women at high risk of cervical cancer, such as HIV infected women should be supported.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonah Musa
- Health Sciences Integrated PhD Program, Center for Healthcare Studies, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA. .,Center for Global Health, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA. .,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria.
| | - Chad J Achenbach
- Center for Global Health, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.,Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA
| | - Charlesnika T Evans
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Center for Health Care Studies, Global Health, Institute for Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.,Center of Innovation for Complex Chronic Healthcare (CINCCH), Department of Veterans Affairs, Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL, USA
| | - Neil Jordan
- Health Sciences Integrated PhD Program, Center for Healthcare Studies, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.,Center of Innovation for Complex Chronic Healthcare (CINCCH), Department of Veterans Affairs, Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL, USA.,Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Science, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA
| | - Patrick H Daru
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria
| | - Lifang Hou
- Center for Global Health, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.,Center for Population Epigenetics, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center and Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
| | - Robert L Murphy
- Center for Global Health, Institute of Public Health and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.,Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA
| | - Isaac F Adewole
- Federal Ministry of Health, Federal Secretariat Complex, Central Business District, Federal Capital, Abuja, Nigeria
| | - Melissa A Simon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Preventive Medicine and Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
A health systems approach to identifying barriers to breast cancer screening programmes. Methodology and application in six European countries. Health Policy 2018; 122:1198-1205. [DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.08.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2018] [Revised: 07/11/2018] [Accepted: 08/17/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
27
|
Schapira MM, Barlow WE, Conant EF, Sprague BL, Tosteson AN, Haas JS, Onega T, Beaber EF, Goodrich M, McCarthy AM, Herschorn SD, Skinner CS, Harrington TO, Geller B. Communication Practices of Mammography Facilities and Timely Follow-up of a Screening Mammogram with a BI-RADS 0 Assessment. Acad Radiol 2018; 25:1118-1127. [PMID: 29433892 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2017.12.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2017] [Revised: 12/15/2017] [Accepted: 12/27/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of communication practices with timely follow-up of screening mammograms read as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (BI-RADS) 0 in the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium. MATERIALS AND METHODS A radiology facility survey was conducted in 2015 with responses linked to screening mammograms obtained in 2011-2014. We considered timely follow-up to be within 15 days of the screening mammogram. Generalized estimating equation models were used to evaluate the association between modes of communication with patients and providers and timely follow-up, adjusting for PROSPR site, patient age, and race and ethnicity. RESULTS The analysis included 34,680 mammography examinations with a BI-RADS 0 assessment among 28 facilities. Across facilities, 85.6% of examinations had a follow-up within 15 days. Patients in a facility where routine practice was to contact the patient by phone if follow-up imaging was recommended were more likely to have timely follow-up (odds ratio [OR] 4.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.76-7.76), whereas standard use of mail was associated with reduced timely follow-up (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75). Facilities that had standard use of electronic medical records to report the need for follow-up imaging to a provider had less timely follow-up (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90). Facilities that routinely contacted patients by mail if they missed a follow-up imaging visit were more likely to have timely follow-up (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.02-2.69). CONCLUSIONS Our findings support the value of telephone communication to patients in relation to timely follow-up. Future research is needed to evaluate the role of communication in completing the breast cancer screening episode.
Collapse
|
28
|
Kegler MC, Beasley DD, Liang S, Cotter M, Phillips E, Hermstad A, Williams R, Martinez J, Riehman K. Using the consolidated framework for implementation research to understand safety net health system efforts to increase colorectal cancer screening rates. HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH 2018; 33:315-326. [PMID: 29982384 DOI: 10.1093/her/cyy019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2017] [Accepted: 06/24/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), this study aimed to identify factors that influence implementation of evidence-based provider and client-oriented strategies to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in safety net health systems. Site visits and key informant interviews (n=33) were conducted with project leaders and staff in five health systems funded by an American Cancer Society grants program. Within- and cross-site analyses identified CFIR constructs that influenced implementation of provider and client-oriented strategies to promote CRC screening through colonoscopies and fecal immunochemical tests. Of the five CFIR domains, constructs within four CFIR domains (inner setting, outer setting, individual characteristics and process domains) were particularly salient in discussions of implementation while constructs within one CFIR domain (characteristics of the intervention) were not. This study provides a detailed description of how facilitating and inhibiting factors influenced the implementation of evidence-based practices related to CRC screening within safety net health systems. These findings can inform future efforts to promote evidence-based strategies to increase CRC screening rates in safety net health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle C Kegler
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Derrick D Beasley
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Shuting Liang
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Megan Cotter
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Emily Phillips
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - April Hermstad
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Rentonia Williams
- Statistics & Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Jeremy Martinez
- Statistics & Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Kara Riehman
- Statistics & Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Sivaram S, Majumdar G, Perin D, Nessa A, Broeders M, Lynge E, Saraiya M, Segnan N, Sankaranarayanan R, Rajaraman P, Trimble E, Taplin S, Rath GK, Mehrotra R. Population-based cancer screening programmes in low-income and middle-income countries: regional consultation of the International Cancer Screening Network in India. Lancet Oncol 2018; 19:e113-e122. [PMID: 29413465 PMCID: PMC5835355 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30003-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2017] [Revised: 10/17/2017] [Accepted: 11/16/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
The reductions in cancer morbidity and mortality afforded by population-based cancer screening programmes have led many low-income and middle-income countries to consider the implementation of national screening programmes in the public sector. Screening at the population level, when planned and organised, can greatly benefit the population, whilst disorganised screening can increase costs and reduce benefits. The International Cancer Screening Network (ICSN) was created to share lessons, experience, and evidence regarding cancer screening in countries with organised screening programmes. Organised screening programmes provide screening to an identifiable target population and use multidisciplinary delivery teams, coordinated clinical oversight committees, and regular review by a multidisciplinary evaluation board to maximise benefit to the target population. In this Series paper, we report outcomes of the first regional consultation of the ICSN held in Agartala, India (Sept 5-7, 2016), which included discussions from cancer screening programmes from Denmark, the Netherlands, USA, and Bangladesh. We outline six essential elements of population-based cancer screening programmes, and share recommendations from the meeting that policy makers might want to consider before implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sudha Sivaram
- Public Health Research Branch, Center for Global Health, US National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
| | | | - Douglas Perin
- Public Health Research Branch, Center for Global Health, US National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Ashrafun Nessa
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bangabandhu Sheikh, Mujib Medical University, Shahbag, Dhaka, Bangladesh
| | - Mireille Broeders
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboudumc, and Dutch Expert Centre for Screening, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Elsebeth Lynge
- Center of Epidemiology and Screening, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mona Saraiya
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Nereo Segnan
- Center for Epidemiology and Prevention in Oncology, CPO Piemonte, WHO Collaborative Center for Cancer Early Diagnosis and Screening, University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan
- Screening Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France; RTI International-India, New Delhi, India
| | - Preetha Rajaraman
- Office of Global Affairs, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Embassy, New Delhi, India
| | - Edward Trimble
- Public Health Research Branch, Center for Global Health, US National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Stephen Taplin
- Public Health Research Branch, Center for Global Health, US National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - G K Rath
- Rotary Cancer Center, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India
| | - Ravi Mehrotra
- National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research, and WHO-Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Smokeless Tobacco Global Knowledge Hub, National Capital Region, India
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Massetti GM, Townsend JS, Thomas CC, Basile KC, Richardson LC. Healthcare Access and Cancer Screening Among Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2017; 27:607-614. [PMID: 28880705 DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intimate partner violence (IPV) victims often experience substantial and persistent mental and physical health problems, including increased risk for chronic disease and barriers to healthcare access. This study investigated the association between IPV and cancer screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from the eight states and one U.S. territory that administered the optional IPV module in 2006 were analyzed to examine demographic characteristics, health behaviors, health status, healthcare coverage, use of health services, and cancer screening among men and women who reported IPV victimization compared with those among men and women who did not. IPV victimization included physical violence, threats, and sexual violence. RESULTS In the nine jurisdictions that administered the IPV module, 23.6% of women and 11.3% of men experienced IPV. Fewer women and men reporting IPV victimization had health insurance, a personal doctor or healthcare provider, or regular checkups within the past 2 years than nonvictims. More male and female IPV victims were current tobacco users and engaged in binge drinking in the past month. IPV victims of both sexes also had poorer health status, lower life satisfaction, less social and emotional support, and more days with poor physical and mental health in the past month than nonvictims. IPV victimization was associated with lower rates of mammography and colorectal cancer screening but not cervical cancer screening in women and was not associated with colorectal cancer screening in men. In multivariable logistic regression results presented as adjusted proportions controlling for demographics, health status, and healthcare access, only the association with mammography screening remained significant, and the magnitude of this association was modest. CONCLUSIONS There were consistent differences between IPV victims and nonvictims in nearly every measure of healthcare access, health status, and preventive service use. Much of this association seems explained by population characteristics associated with both IPV and lower use of preventive service use, including differences in demographic characteristics, health status, and healthcare access. Healthcare providers could take steps to identify populations at high risk for lack of access or use of preventive services and IPV victimization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Greta M Massetti
- 1 Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Julie S Townsend
- 1 Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Cheryll C Thomas
- 1 Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Kathleen C Basile
- 2 Division of Violence Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Lisa C Richardson
- 1 Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Buist DSM, Gao H, Anderson ML, Onega T, Brandzel S, Rabelhofer MA, Bradford SC, Aiello Bowles EJ. Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters. Prev Med 2017; 102:49-58. [PMID: 28655547 PMCID: PMC5638650 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.06.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2017] [Revised: 06/19/2017] [Accepted: 06/22/2017] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
We compared the effectiveness of two outreach strategies on timely mammography adherence: a mammogram-specific reminder letter (sent just before a woman was due) to a birthday letter (addresses multiple preventive services and not timed around due dates). We evaluated screening mammography adherence following 79,848 mammogram-specific and 151,626 birthday letters mailed between 2002 and 2012 to women aged 40-74years enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington. Screening mammogram adherence was specifically tied to due date and was evaluated separately by age group and up-to-date or overdue status at the time of mailing. We used generalized estimating equations to account for correlation between repeated observations, to model the odds of screening mammography adherence by letter type. Among women up-to-date, adherence following birthday letters was 22-76% lower compared to the mammogram-specific reminders, with the greatest decreases in adherence in women aged 70-74. Birthday letters were more effective at activating screening uptake among some subgroups of overdue women aged 50-69 and most overdue women aged 70-74, but universally low adherence rates were observed in overdue women. Increasing number of recommended services for women aged 50-74 who were up-to-date resulted in 12-17% lower mammography adherence, but had no effect in women aged 40-49 or in overdue women. Birthday letters are less effective than mammogram-specific reminder letters at prompting women to undergo timely breast cancer screening, particularly among women up-to-date with screening. Birthday letters may be effective at increasing overall preventive care; however, supplemental outreach may be needed around the due date to increase timely preventive services receipt.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Diana S M Buist
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | - Hongyuan Gao
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | - Melissa L Anderson
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | - Tracy Onega
- Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth, 1 Rope Ferry Rd, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.
| | - Susan Brandzel
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA; Health Stories Project Insights, 601 Union Street, Suite 4820, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | - Melissa A Rabelhofer
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | - Susan Carol Bradford
- Kaiser Permanente Washington, Clinical Prevention and Improvement, 310 15th Ave E, Seattle, WA 98112, USA.
| | - Erin J Aiello Bowles
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance Among Patients With Cirrhosis in a Population-based Integrated Health Care Delivery System. J Clin Gastroenterol 2017; 51:650-655. [PMID: 27870642 PMCID: PMC5436954 DOI: 10.1097/mcg.0000000000000708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Fewer than 1 in 5 patients with cirrhosis receive hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance; however, most studies were performed in select patient populations, which may not be informative of practice patterns in population-based community practices. Further, few reported guideline-concordant consistent surveillance rates. GOALS Characterize guideline-concordant HCC surveillance rates and patient-level factors associated with surveillance among a population-based cohort of patients with cirrhosis. STUDY We retrospectively characterized HCC surveillance among cirrhosis patients followed between January 2010 and December 2012 at an integrated health care delivery system in Washington state. Consistent surveillance was defined as an ultrasound every 6 months, and inconsistent surveillance was defined as ≥1 ultrasound during the 2-year follow-up period. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify correlates of HCC surveillance receipt. RESULTS Of 1137 patients with cirrhosis, 22 (2%) underwent consistent surveillance, 371 (33%) had inconsistent surveillance, and 744 (65%) received no surveillance during follow-up. Correlates of HCC surveillance receipt in multivariate analysis included Gastroenterology/Hepatology subspecialty care [odds ratio (OR), 1.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.44-2.46], Child Pugh B/C cirrhosis (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.43), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.13-2.35), and etiology of liver disease. Compared with hepatitis C-infected patients, patients with hepatitis B infection were more likely to undergo surveillance (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.28-5.81), whereas patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.93) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28-0.56) were less likely to undergo surveillance. CONCLUSIONS Although one third of patients undergo inconsistent HCC surveillance, <2% of patients receive guideline-concordant biannual HCC surveillance.
Collapse
|
33
|
Senore C, Bellisario C, Hassan C. Organization of surveillance in GI practice. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2016; 30:855-866. [PMID: 27938781 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2016] [Accepted: 08/07/2016] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several reports documented an inefficient utilisation of available resources, as well as a suboptimal compliance with surveillance recommendations. Although, evidence suggests that organisational issues can influence the quality of care delivered, surveillance protocols are usually based on non-organized approaches. METHODS We conducted a literature search (publication date: 01/2000-06/2016) on PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for guidelines, or consensus statements, for surveys of practice, reporting information about patients, or providers attitudes and behaviours, for intervention studies to enhance compliance with guidelines. Related articles were also scrutinised. Based on the clinical relevance and burden on endoscopy services this review was focused on surveillance for Barrett's oesophagus, IBD and post-polypectomy surveillance of colonic adenomas. RESULTS Existing guidelines are generally recognising structure and process requirements influencing delivery of surveillance interventions, while less attention had been devoted to transitions and interfaces in the care process. Available evidence from practice surveys is suggesting the need to design organizational strategies aimed to enable patients to attend and providers to deliver timely and appropriate care. Well designed studies assessing the effectiveness of specific interventions in this setting are however lacking. Indirect evidence from screening settings would suggest that the implementation of automated standardized recall systems, utilisation of clinical registries, removing financial barriers, could improve appropriateness of use and compliance with recommendations. CONCLUSIONS Lack of sound evidence regarding utility and methodology of surveillance can contribute to explain the observed variability in providers and patients attitudes and in compliance with the recommended surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Senore
- SC Epidemiologia, Screening, Registro Tumori - CPO, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy.
| | - Cristina Bellisario
- SC Epidemiologia, Screening, Registro Tumori - CPO, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Servizio di Gastroenterologia, Ospedale Nuovo Regina Margherita, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Bae JM, Jamoulle M. Primary Care Physicians' Action Plans for Responding to Results of Screening Tests Based on the Concept of Quaternary Prevention. J Prev Med Public Health 2016; 49:343-348. [PMID: 27951627 PMCID: PMC5160136 DOI: 10.3961/jpmph.16.059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2016] [Accepted: 10/13/2016] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Since noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are generally controllable rather than curable, more emphasis is placed on prevention than on treatment. For the early detection of diseases, primary care physicians (PCPs), as well as general practitioners and family physicians, should interpret screening results accurately and provide screenees with appropriate information about prevention and treatment, including potential harms. The concept of quaternary prevention (QP), which was introduced by Jamoulle and Roland in 1995, has been applied to screening results. This article summarizes situations that PCPs encounter during screening tests according to the concept of QP, and suggests measures to face such situations. It is suggested that screening tests be customized to fit individual characteristics instead of being performed based on general guidelines. Since screening tests should not be carried out in some circumstances, further studies based on the concept of prevention levels proposed by Jamoulle and Roland are required for the development of strategies to prevent NCDs, including cancers. Thus, applying the concept of QP helps PCPs gain better insights into screening tests aimed at preventing NCDs and also helps improve the doctor-patient relationship by helping screenees understand medical uncertainties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jong-Myon Bae
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju, Korea
| | - Marc Jamoulle
- Department of General Practice, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Schapira MM, Sprague BL, Klabunde CN, Tosteson ANA, Bitton A, Chen JS, Beaber EF, Onega T, MacLean CD, Harris K, Howe K, Pearson L, Feldman S, Brawarsky P, Haas JS. Inadequate Systems to Support Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening in Primary Care Practice. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31:1148-55. [PMID: 27251058 PMCID: PMC5023599 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-016-3726-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2015] [Revised: 03/25/2016] [Accepted: 04/22/2016] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite substantial resources devoted to cancer screening nationally, the availability of clinical practice-based systems to support screening guidelines is not known. OBJECTIVE To characterize the prevalence and correlates of practice-based systems to support breast and cervical cancer screening, with a focus on the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). DESIGN Web and mail survey of primary care providers conducted in 2014. The survey assessed provider (gender, training) and facility (size, specialty training, physician report of National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH recognition, and practice affiliation) characteristics. A hierarchical multivariate analysis clustered by clinical practice was conducted to evaluate characteristics associated with the adoption of practice-based systems and technology to support guideline-adherent screening. PARTICIPANTS Primary care physicians in family medicine, general internal medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology, and nurse practitioners or physician assistants from four clinical care networks affiliated with PROSPR (Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens) consortium research centers. MAIN MEASURES The prevalence of routine breast cancer risk assessment, electronic health record (EHR) decision support, comparative performance reports, and panel reports of patients due for routine screening and follow-up. KEY RESULTS There were 385 participants (57.6 % of eligible). Forty-seven percent (47.0 %) of providers reported NCQA recognition as a PCMH. Less than half reported EHR decision support for breast (48.8 %) or cervical cancer (46.2 %) screening. A minority received comparative performance reports for breast (26.2 %) or cervical (19.7 %) cancer screening, automated reports of patients overdue for breast (18.7 %) or cervical (16.4 %) cancer screening, or follow-up of abnormal breast (18.1 %) or cervical (17.6 %) cancer screening tests. In multivariate analysis, reported NCQA recognition as a PCMH was associated with greater use of comparative performance reports of guideline-adherent breast (OR 3.23, 95 % CI 1.58-6.61) or cervical (OR 2.56, 95 % CI 1.32-4.96) cancer screening and automated reports of patients overdue for breast (OR 2.19, 95 % CI 1.15-41.7) or cervical (OR. 2.56, 95 % CI 1.26-5.26) cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS Providers lack systems to support breast and cervical cancer screening. Practice transformation toward a PCMH may support the adoption of systems to achieve guideline-adherent cancer screening in primary care settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marilyn M Schapira
- University of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia VA Medical Center, 1110 Blockley Hall, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
| | | | - Carrie N Klabunde
- Office of Disease Prevention, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Anna N A Tosteson
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH, USA
| | - Asaf Bitton
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jane S Chen
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Tracy Onega
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH, USA
| | | | | | | | - Loretta Pearson
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH, USA
| | - Sarah Feldman
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Jennifer S Haas
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Woman's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Krok-Schoen JL, Fisher JL, Baltic RD, Paskett ED. White-Black Differences in Cancer Incidence, Stage at Diagnosis, and Survival among Adults Aged 85 Years and Older in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016; 25:1517-1523. [PMID: 27528599 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0354] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2016] [Accepted: 07/29/2016] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Increased life expectancy, growth of minority populations, and advances in cancer screening and treatment have resulted in an increasing number of older, racially diverse cancer survivors. Potential black/white disparities in cancer incidence, stage, and survival among the oldest old (≥85 years) were examined using data from the SEER Program of the National Cancer Institute. METHODS Differences in cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis were examined for cases diagnosed within the most recent 5-year period, and changes in these differences over time were examined for white and black cases aged ≥85 years. Five-year relative cancer survival rate was also examined by race. RESULTS Among those aged ≥85 years, black men had higher colorectal, lung and bronchus, and prostate cancer incidence rates than white men, respectively. From 1973 to 2012, lung and bronchus and female breast cancer incidence increased, while colorectal and prostate cancer incidence decreased among this population. Blacks had higher rates of unstaged cancer compared with whites. The 5-year relative survival rate for all invasive cancers combined was higher for whites than blacks. Notably, whites had more than three times the relative survival rate of lung and bronchus cancer when diagnosed at localized (35.1% vs. 11.6%) and regional (12.2% vs. 3.2%) stages than blacks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS White and black differences in cancer incidence, stage, and survival exist in the ≥85 population. IMPACT Continued efforts are needed to reduce white and black differences in cancer prevention and treatment among the ≥85 population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(11); 1517-23. ©2016 AACR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - James L Fisher
- Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Ryan D Baltic
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Electra D Paskett
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Liang S, Kegler MC, Cotter M, Emily P, Beasley D, Hermstad A, Morton R, Martinez J, Riehman K. Integrating evidence-based practices for increasing cancer screenings in safety net health systems: a multiple case study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implement Sci 2016; 11:109. [PMID: 27485452 PMCID: PMC4970264 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-016-0477-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2016] [Accepted: 07/25/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) to increase cancer screenings in safety net primary care systems has great potential for reducing cancer disparities. Yet there is a gap in understanding the factors and mechanisms that influence EBP implementation within these high-priority systems. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), our study aims to fill this gap with a multiple case study of health care safety net systems that were funded by an American Cancer Society (ACS) grants program to increase breast and colorectal cancer screening rates. The initiative funded 68 safety net systems to increase cancer screening through implementation of evidence-based provider and client-oriented strategies. Methods Data are from a mixed-methods evaluation with nine purposively selected safety net systems. Fifty-two interviews were conducted with project leaders, implementers, and ACS staff. Funded safety net systems were categorized into high-, medium-, and low-performing cases based on the level of EBP implementation. Within- and cross-case analyses were performed to identify CFIR constructs that influenced level of EBP implementation. Results Of 39 CFIR constructs examined, six distinguished levels of implementation. Two constructs were from the intervention characteristics domain: adaptability and trialability. Three were from the inner setting domain: leadership engagement, tension for change, and access to information and knowledge. Engaging formally appointed internal implementation leaders, from the process domain, also distinguished level of implementation. No constructs from the outer setting or individual characteristics domain differentiated systems by level of implementation. Conclusions Our study identified a number of influential CFIR constructs and illustrated how they impacted EBP implementation across a variety of safety net systems. Findings may inform future dissemination efforts of EBPs for increasing cancer screening in similar settings. Moreover, our analytic approach is similar to previous case studies using CFIR and hence could facilitate comparisons across studies. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0477-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuting Liang
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - Michelle C Kegler
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
| | - Megan Cotter
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - Phillips Emily
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - Derrick Beasley
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - April Hermstad
- Emory Prevention Research Center, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - Rentonia Morton
- Statistics and Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., 250 Williams St., Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA
| | - Jeremy Martinez
- Statistics and Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., 250 Williams St., Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA
| | - Kara Riehman
- Statistics and Evaluation Center, Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Inc., 250 Williams St., Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
de la Riva EE, Hajjar N, Tom LS, Phillips S, Dong X, Simon MA. Providers' Views on a Community-Wide Patient Navigation Program: Implications for Dissemination and Future Implementation. Health Promot Pract 2016; 17:382-90. [PMID: 27009130 PMCID: PMC5600160 DOI: 10.1177/1524839916628865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The DuPage Patient Navigation Collaborative (DPNC) adapted and scaled the Patient Navigation Research Program's intervention model to navigate uninsured suburban DuPage County women with an abnormal breast or cervical cancer screening result. Recent findings reveal the effectiveness of the DPNC in addressing patient risk factors for delayed follow-up, but gaps remain as patient measures may not adequately capture navigator impact. Using semistructured interviews with 19 DPNC providers (representing the county health department, clinics, advocacy organizations, and academic partners), this study explores the critical roles of the DPNC in strengthening community partnerships and enhancing clinical services. Findings from these provider interviews revealed that a wide range of resources existed within DuPage but were often underused. Providers indicated that the DPNC was instrumental in fostering community partnerships and that navigators enhanced the referral processes, communications, and service delivery among clinical teams. Providers also recommended expanding navigation to mental health, women's health, and for a variety of chronic conditions. Considering that many in the United States have recently gained access to the health care system, clinical teams might benefit by incorporating navigators who serve a dual working purpose embedded in the community and clinics to enhance the service delivery for vulnerable populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Laura S Tom
- Northwestern University-Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Sara Phillips
- Northwestern University-Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - XinQi Dong
- Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Melissa A Simon
- Northwestern University-Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Breslau ES, Gorin SS, Edwards HM, Schonberg MA, Saiontz N, Walter LC. An Individualized Approach to Cancer Screening Decisions in Older Adults: A Multilevel Framework. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31:539-47. [PMID: 26941042 PMCID: PMC4835387 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-016-3629-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2015] [Revised: 02/05/2016] [Accepted: 02/05/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Guidelines for optimal cancer screening in older adults remain unclear, particularly for adults over the age of 75. While cancer screening in older adults may benefit some in good health, it may cause unnecessary burdens in others with limited life expectancy. Thus, a systematic approach to enable individualized cancer screening decisions in older adults is needed. We suggest a framework that guides such decisions through evidence-based approaches from multiple interactions, and that involves the patient, clinician, and healthcare system. An individualized approach considers differences in disease risk rather than the chronological age of the patient. This paper presents a comprehensive framework that depicts the independent and converging levels of influences on individualized cancer screening decisions in older adults. This Individualized Decisions for Screening (IDS) framework recognizes the reality of these interrelationships, including the tensions that arise when behaviors and outcomes are valued differently at the patient, clinician, and healthcare organization levels. Person-centered approaches are essential to advancing multilevel research of individualized cancer screening decisions among older adults.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erica S Breslau
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20850-9761, USA.
| | - Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin
- Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, MD, 21702, USA
- New York Physicians Against Cancer, Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, 10032, NY, USA
| | - Heather M Edwards
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Washington, 20036, DC, USA
| | - Mara A Schonberg
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, 02215, MA, USA
| | - Nicole Saiontz
- Office of the Director, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, 20850-9761, MD, USA
| | - Louise C Walter
- Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, University of California San Francisco and the San Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, 94121, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Abstract
The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends patient-physician discussions about the appropriateness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults ages 76-84 years who have never been screened. In this study, we used data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey to examine patterns of CRC screening and provider recommendation among seniors ages 76-84 years, and made some comparisons to younger adults. Nationally-representative samples of 1379 adults ages 76-84 years and 8797 adults ages 50-75 years responded to questions about CRC screening status, receipt of provider recommendation, and discussion of test options; 22.7% (95% CI 20.1-25.3) of seniors ages 76-84 had never been tested for CRC and therefore were not up-to-date with guidelines; 3.9% (95% CI 2.0-7.6) of these individuals reported a recent provider recommendation for screening. In multivariate analyses, the likelihood of never having been tested was significantly greater for seniors of other/multiple race or Hispanic ethnicity; with high school or less education; without private health insurance coverage; who had ≤ 1 doctor visit in the past year; without recent screening for breast, cervical, or prostate cancer; with no or unknown CRC family history; or with ≤ 1 chronic disease. Among the minority of respondents ages 50-75 and 76-84 reporting a provider recommendation, 73.2% indicated that the provider recommended particular tests, which was overwhelmingly colonoscopy (≥ 89 %). Nearly one-quarter of adults 76-84 have never been screened for CRC, and rates of provider recommendation in this group are very low. Greater attention to informed CRC screening discussions with screening-eligible seniors is needed.
Collapse
|
41
|
Alfonzo E, Andersson Ellström A, Nemes S, Strander B. Effect of Fee on Cervical Cancer Screening Attendance--ScreenFee, a Swedish Population-Based Randomised Trial. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0150888. [PMID: 26986848 PMCID: PMC4795635 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150888] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2015] [Accepted: 02/19/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Attendance in the cervical cancer screening programme is one of the most important factors to lower the risk of contracting the disease. Attendance rates are often low in areas with low socioeconomic status. Charging a fee for screening might possibly decrease attendance in this population. Screening programme coverage is low in low socio-economic status areas in Gothenburg, Sweden, but has increased slightly after multiple interventions in recent years. For many years, women in the region have paid a fee for screening. We studied the effect of abolishing this fee in a trial emanating from the regular cervical cancer screening programme. METHOD Individually randomised controlled trial. All 3 124 women in three low-resource areas in Gothenburg, due for screening during the study period, were randomised to receive an offer of a free test or the standard invitation stating the regular fee of 100 SEK (≈11 €). The study was conducted during the first six months of 2013. Attendance was defined as a registered Pap smear within 90 days from the date the invitation was sent out. RESULTS Attendance did not differ significantly between women who were charged and those offered free screening (RR 0.93; CI 0.85-1.02). No differences were found within the districts or as an effect of age, attendance after the most recent previous invitation or previous experience of smear taking. CONCLUSION Abolishment of a modest screening fee in socially disadvantaged urban districts with low coverage, after previous multiple systematic interventions, does not increase attendance in the short term. Other interventions might be more important for increasing attendance in low socio-economic status areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02378324.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilia Alfonzo
- The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- * E-mail:
| | | | - Szilard Nemes
- The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Björn Strander
- The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Influence of primary care practices on patients' uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening: a qualitative case study. Br J Gen Pract 2015; 64:e484-92. [PMID: 25071061 PMCID: PMC4111341 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14x680965] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The NHS Diabetic Eye Screening Programme aims to reduce the risk of sight loss among people with diabetes in England by enabling prompt diagnosis of sight-threatening retinopathy. However, the rate of screening uptake between practices can vary from 55% to 95%. Existing research focuses on the impact of patient demographics but little is known about GP practice-related factors that can make a difference. Aim To identify factors contributing to high or low patient uptake of retinopathy screening. Design and setting Qualitative case-based study; nine purposively selected GP practices (deprived/affluent; high/low screening uptake) in three retinopathy screening programme areas. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients, primary care professionals, and screeners. A comparative case-based analysis was carried out to identify factors related to high or low screening uptake. Results Eight possible factors that influenced uptake were identified. Five modifiable factors related to service and staff interactions: communication with screening services; contacting patients; integration of screening with other care; focus on the newly diagnosed; and perception of non-attenders. Three factors were non-modifiable challenges related to practice location: level of deprivation; diversity of ethnicities and languages; and transport and access. All practices adopted strategies to improve uptake, but the presence of two or more major barriers made it very hard for practices to achieve higher uptake levels. Conclusions A range of service-level opportunities to improve screening attendance were identified that are available to practices and screening teams. More research is needed into the complex interfaces of care that make up retinopathy screening.
Collapse
|
43
|
Katz ML, Keller B, Tatum CM, Fickle DK, Midkiff C, Carver S, Krieger JL, Slater MD, Paskett ED. Community Members' Input into Cancer Prevention Campaign Development and Experience Being Featured in the Campaign. Prog Community Health Partnersh 2015; 9:149-56. [PMID: 26412757 DOI: 10.1353/cpr.2015.0043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates are increased and CRC screening rates are lower among Appalachia Ohio residents. OBJECTIVES We sought to describe 1) a partnership of cancer researchers and community members that developed county-specific media campaigns to improve CRC screening rates (intervention) and fruit and vegetable consumption (control) and 2) the experience of community members featured in the campaigns. METHODS Community members assisted with campaign development, were featured in campaigns, identified locations for materials, and promoted the campaigns. Campaigns included billboards, posters, and information in local newspapers. A mailed survey assessed featured community members' experiences in the campaigns. LESSONS LEARNED Ongoing communication among members of the partnership was critical to successful community-level campaigns. Featured community members had mostly positive experiences about being included in the campaigns. CONCLUSIONS Having a shared vision, ongoing trust, and good communication are essential elements to maintaining a viable academic-community partnership.
Collapse
|
44
|
Senore C, Inadomi J, Segnan N, Bellisario C, Hassan C. Optimising colorectal cancer screening acceptance: a review. Gut 2015; 64:1158-77. [PMID: 26059765 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2014] [Accepted: 03/09/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
The study aims to review available evidence concerning effective interventions to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening acceptance. We performed a literature search of randomised trials designed to increase individuals' use of CRC screening on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Small (≤ 100 subjects per arm) studies and those reporting results of interventions implemented before publication of the large faecal occult blood test trials were excluded. Interventions were categorised following the Continuum of Cancer Care and the PRECEDE-PROCEED models and studies were grouped by screening model (opportunistic vs organised). Multifactor interventions targeting multiple levels of care and considering factors outside the individual clinician control, represent the most effective strategy to enhance CRC screening acceptance. Removing financial barriers, implementing methods allowing a systematic contact of the whole target population, using personal invitation letters, preferably signed by the reference care provider, and reminders mailed to all non-attendees are highly effective in enhancing CRC screening acceptance. Physician reminders may support the diffusion of screening, but they can be effective only for individuals who have access to and make use of healthcare services. Educational interventions for patients and providers are effective, but the implementation of organisational measures may be necessary to favour their impact. Available evidence indicates that organised programmes allow to achieve an extensive coverage and to enhance equity of access, while maximising the health impact of screening. They provide at the same time an infrastructure allowing to achieve a more favourable cost-effectiveness profile of potentially effective strategies, which would not be sustainable in opportunistic settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Senore
- Centro di Prevenzione Oncologica (CPO Piemonte), AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - John Inadomi
- Digestive Disease Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Nereo Segnan
- Centro di Prevenzione Oncologica (CPO Piemonte), AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Cristina Bellisario
- Centro di Prevenzione Oncologica (CPO Piemonte), AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Unit of Gastroenterology, Ospedale Nuovo Regina Margherita, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Beaber EF, Kim JJ, Schapira MM, Tosteson ANA, Zauber AG, Geiger AM, Kamineni A, Weaver DL, Tiro JA. Unifying screening processes within the PROSPR consortium: a conceptual model for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:djv120. [PMID: 25957378 PMCID: PMC4838064 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2014] [Revised: 02/18/2015] [Accepted: 04/03/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
General frameworks of the cancer screening process are available, but none directly compare the process in detail across different organ sites. This limits the ability of medical and public health professionals to develop and evaluate coordinated screening programs that apply resources and population management strategies available for one cancer site to other sites. We present a trans-organ conceptual model that incorporates a single screening episode for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers into a unified framework based on clinical guidelines and protocols; the model concepts could be expanded to other organ sites. The model covers four types of care in the screening process: risk assessment, detection, diagnosis, and treatment. Interfaces between different provider teams (eg, primary care and specialty care), including communication and transfer of responsibility, may occur when transitioning between types of care. Our model highlights across each organ site similarities and differences in steps, interfaces, and transitions in the screening process and documents the conclusion of a screening episode. This model was developed within the National Cancer Institute-funded consortium Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR). PROSPR aims to optimize the screening process for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer and includes seven research centers and a statistical coordinating center. Given current health care reform initiatives in the United States, this conceptual model can facilitate the development of comprehensive quality metrics for cancer screening and promote trans-organ comparative cancer screening research. PROSPR findings will support the design of interventions that improve screening outcomes across multiple cancer sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth F Beaber
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT).
| | - Jane J Kim
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Marilyn M Schapira
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Anna N A Tosteson
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Ann G Zauber
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Ann M Geiger
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Donald L Weaver
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Jasmin A Tiro
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Partin MR, Burgess DJ, Burgess JF, Gravely A, Haggstrom D, Lillie SE, Nugent S, Powell AA, Shaukat A, Walter LC, Nelson DB. Organizational predictors of colonoscopy follow-up for positive fecal occult blood test results: an observational study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2015; 24:422-34. [PMID: 25471345 PMCID: PMC4323731 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-14-1170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study assessed the contribution of organizational structures and processes identified from facility surveys to follow-up for positive fecal occult blood tests [FOBT-positive (FOBT(+))]. METHODS We identified 74,104 patients with FOBT(+) results from 98 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities between August 16, 2009 and March 20, 2011, and followed them until September 30, 2011, for completion of colonoscopy. We identified patient characteristics from VHA administrative records, and organizational factors from facility surveys completed by primary care and gastroenterology chiefs. We estimated predictors of colonoscopy completion within 60 days and six months using hierarchical logistic regression models. RESULTS Thirty percent of patients with FOBT(+) results received colonoscopy within 60 days and 49% within six months. Having gastroenterology or laboratory staff notify gastroenterology providers directly about FOBT(+) cases was a significant predictor of 60-day [odds ratio (OR), 1.85; P = 0.01] and six-month follow-up (OR, 1.25; P = 0.008). Additional predictors of 60-day follow-up included adequacy of colonoscopy appointment availability (OR, 1.43; P = 0.01) and frequent individual feedback to primary care providers about FOBT(+) referral timeliness (OR, 1.79; P = 0.04). Additional predictors of six-month follow-up included using guideline-concordant surveillance intervals for low-risk adenomas (OR, 1.57; P = 0.01) and using group appointments and combined verbal-written methods for colonoscopy preparation instruction (OR, 1.48; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION Directly notifying gastroenterology providers about FOBT(+) results, using guideline-concordant adenoma surveillance intervals, and using colonoscopy preparations instruction methods that provide both verbal and written information may increase overall follow-up rates. Enhancing follow-up within 60 days may require increased colonoscopy capacity and feedback to primary care providers. IMPACT These findings may inform organizational-level interventions to improve FOBT(+) follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa R Partin
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Diana J Burgess
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - James F Burgess
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Boston Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Boston, Massachusetts. Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Amy Gravely
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - David Haggstrom
- VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Health Information and Communication, Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana. Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Sarah E Lillie
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Sean Nugent
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Adam A Powell
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Aasma Shaukat
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Louise C Walter
- Division of Geriatrics, San Francisco VA Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - David B Nelson
- Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Decker KM, Singh H. Reducing inequities in colorectal cancer screening in North America. J Carcinog 2014; 13:12. [PMID: 25506266 PMCID: PMC4253036 DOI: 10.4103/1477-3163.144576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2014] [Accepted: 10/14/2014] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important cause of mortality and morbidity in North America. Screening using a fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy reduces CRC mortality through the detection and treatment of precancerous polyps and early stage CRC. Although CRC screening participation has increased in recent years, large inequities still exist. Minorities, new immigrants, and those with lower levels of education or income are much less likely to be screened. This review provides an overview of the commonly used tests for CRC screening, disparities in CRC screening, and promising methods at the individual, provider, and system levels to reduce these disparities. Overall, to achieve high CRC participation rates and reduce the burden of CRC in the population, a multi-faceted approach that uses strategies at all levels to reduce CRC screening disparities is urgently required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathleen M Decker
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Canada ; Screening Programs, Cancer Care Manitoba, Canada
| | - Harminder Singh
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Canada ; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, Canada ; Department of Haematology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Care Manitoba, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Zapka JM, Edwards HM, Chollette V, Taplin SH. Follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests: considering the multilevel context of care. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014; 23:1965-73. [PMID: 25073625 PMCID: PMC4191903 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-14-0454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
The call for multilevel interventions to improve the quality of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening has been out for a decade, but published work emphasizes individual approaches, and conceptualizations differ regarding the definition of levels. To investigate the scope and methods being undertaken in this focused area of follow-up to abnormal tests (breast, colon, cervical), we reviewed recent literature and grants (2007-2012) funded by the National Cancer Institute. A structured search yielded 16 grants with varying definitions of "follow-up" (e.g., completion of recommended tests, time to diagnosis); most included minority racial/ethnic group participants. Ten grants concentrated on measurement/intervention development and 13 piloted or tested interventions (categories not mutually exclusive). All studies considered patient-level factors and effects. Although some directed interventions at provider levels, few measured group characteristics and effects of interventions on the providers or levels other than the patient. Multilevel interventions are being proposed, but clarity about endpoints, definition of levels, and measures is needed. The differences in the conceptualization of levels and factors that affect practice need empirical exploration, and we need to measure their salient characteristics to advance our understanding of how context affects cancer care delivery in a changing practice and policy environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane M Zapka
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.
| | - Heather M Edwards
- Clinical Research Directorate/CMRP, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, Maryland
| | - Veronica Chollette
- Process of Care Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Stephen H Taplin
- Process of Care Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Williams JH, Carter SM, Rychetnik L. 'Organised' cervical screening 45 years on: How consistent are organised screening practices? Eur J Cancer 2014; 50:3029-38. [PMID: 25282406 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2014] [Revised: 09/04/2014] [Accepted: 09/05/2014] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Organised screening programmes have been remarkably successful in reducing incidence and mortality from cervical cancer, while opportunistic screening varies in its effectiveness. Experts recommend that cervical screening or HPV testing be carried out only in the context of an organised programme. We sought to answer the following study questions: What does it mean for a cervical screening programme to be organised? Is there a place for opportunistic screening (in an organised programme)? We reviewed 154 peer-reviewed papers on organised and opportunistic approaches to cervical screening published between 1970 and 2014 to understand how the term 'organised' is used, formally and in practice. We found that despite broad recognition of a prescriptive definition of organisation, in practice the meaning of organisation is much less clear. Our review revealed descriptions of organised programmes that differ significantly from prescribed norms and from each other, and a variety of ways that opportunistic and organised programmes intersect. We describe the breadth of the variation in cervical cancer screening programmes and examine the relationships and overlaps between organised and opportunistic screening. Implications emerging from the review include the need to better understand the breadth of organisation in practice, the drivers and impacts of opportunistic screening and the impact of opportunistic screening on population programme outcomes. Appreciation of the complexity of cervical screening programmes will benefit both screeners and women as programmes are changed to reflect a partially vaccinated population, new evidence and new technologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane H Williams
- Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine (VELiM), K25, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia.
| | - Stacy M Carter
- Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine (VELiM), K25, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia.
| | - Lucie Rychetnik
- School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame, NSW 2010, Australia; Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine (VELiM), K25, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Broberg G, Strander B, Ellis J, Adolfsson A. Attending cervical cancer screening, opportunities and obstacles: a qualitative study on midwives' experiences telephoning non-attendees in Sweden. Scand J Public Health 2014; 42:691-7. [PMID: 25013212 DOI: 10.1177/1403494814541594] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
AIM As part of a research project aimed at increasing participation in the cervical cancer screening program (CCS), we explored midwives' unique experiences of telephoning non-attendees and offering Pap smear appointments. METHODS Twenty midwives, in four focus groups, discussed their experiences of a study investigating ways to increase participation in the CCS. The group discussions were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim and underwent qualitative content analysis. RESULTS Speaking with more than 1000 non-attendees provided the midwives with new perspective on the CCS and they realised that improving it might address a number of reasons for not participating. These reasons were often related to logistics, such as scheduling flexibility and appointment booking. The telephone conversations revealed that some women required more individual attention, while it was discovered that others did not require screening. The midwives considered the CCS to be life-saving; participating in this screening activity gave them a sense of satisfaction and pride. CONCLUSIONS This study shows that midwives can improve access and prevent non-attendance at the cervical cancer screening program when they are aware of women's varying requirements for attending screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gudrun Broberg
- The Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden Närhälsan Primary Care, Western Health Care Region, Sweden
| | - Björn Strander
- The Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden The Regional Cancer Centre, Western Health Care Region, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Joy Ellis
- The Regional Cancer Centre, Western Health Care Region, Gothenburg, Sweden Närhälsan Primary Care, Western Health Care Region, Sweden
| | | |
Collapse
|