Office systems and their influence on mammography use in rural and urban primary care

Rural-Urban Disparities in Cancer Outcomes: Opportunities for Future Research

Cancer care disparities among rural populations are increasingly documented and may be worsening, likely because of the impact of rurality on access to state-of-the-art cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment services, as well as higher rates of risk factors such as smoking and obesity. In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology undertook an initiative to understand and address factors contributing to rural cancer care disparities. A key pillar of this initiative was to identify knowledge gaps and promote the research needed to understand the magnitude of difference in outcomes in rural vs nonrural settings, the drivers of those differences, and interventions to address them. The purpose of this review is to describe continued knowledge gaps and areas of priority research to address them. We conducted a comprehensive literature review by searching the PubMed (Medline), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published in English between 1971 and 2021 and restricted to primary reports from populations in the United States and abstracted data to synthesize current evidence and identify continued gaps in knowledge. Our review identified continuing gaps in the literature regarding the underlying causes of rural-urban disparities in cancer outcomes. Rapid advances in cancer care will worsen existing disparities in outcomes for rural patients without directed effort to understand and address barriers to high-quality care in these areas. Research should be prioritized to address ongoing knowledge gaps about the drivers of rurality-based disparities and preventative and corrective interventions.

Geographic Variation in Overscreening for Colorectal, Cervical, and Breast Cancer Among Older Adults

IMPORTANCE

National guidelines balance risks and benefits of population-level cancer screening among adults with average risk. Older adults are not recommended to receive routine screening, but many continue to be screened (ie, are overscreened).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of overscreening for colorectal, cervical, and breast cancers among older adults as well as differences in overscreening by metropolitan status.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The cross-sectional study examined responses to a telephone survey of 176 348 community-dwelling adults. Participants were included if they met age and sex criteria, and they were excluded from each cancer-specific subsample if they had a history of that cancer. Data came from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, administered by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

EXPOSURES

Metropolitan status, according to whether participants lived in a metropolitan statistical area.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overscreening was assessed using US Preventive Services Task Force definitions, ie, whether participants self-reported having a screening after the recommended upper age limit for colorectal (75 years), cervical (65 years), or breast (74 years) cancer.

RESULTS

Of 176 348 participants (155 411 [88.1%] women; mean [SE] age, 75.0 [0.04] years; 150 871 [85.6%] non-Hispanic white; 60 456 [34.3%] with nonmetropolitan residence) the cancer-specific subsamples contained 20 937 [11.9%] men and 34 244 [19.4%] women for colorectal cancer, 82 811 [47.0%] women for cervical cancer, and 38 356 [21.8%] women for breast cancer. Overall, 9461 men (59.3%; 95% CI, 57.6%-61.1%) were overscreened for colorectal cancer; 14 463 women (56.2%; 95% CI, 54.7%-57.6%), for colorectal cancer; 31 988 women (45.8%; 95% CI, 44.9%-46.7%), for cervical cancer; and 26 198 women (74.1%; 95% CI, 73.0%-75.3%), for breast cancer. Overscreening was more common in metropolitan than nonmetropolitan areas for colorectal cancer among women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08-1.39), cervical cancer (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.29), and breast cancer (aOR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.17-1.57). Overscreening for cervical and breast cancers was also associated with having a usual source of care compared with not (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.56-2.25; breast cancer: aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.58-2.76), good, very good, or excellent self-reported health compared with fair or poor self-reported health (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.32; breast cancer: aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28-1.69), an educational attainment greater than a high school diploma compared with a high school diploma or less (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; breast cancer: aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.16-1.46), and being married or living as married compared with other marital status (eg, cervical cancer: OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.26-1.46; breast cancer: OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.34-1.77).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, overscreening for cancer among older adults was high, particularly for women living in metropolitan areas. Overscreening could be associated with health care access and patient-clinician relationships. Additional research on why overscreening persists and how to reduce overscreening is needed to minimize risks associated with cancer screening among older adults.

Navigating the Needs of Rural Women with Breast Cancer: A Breast Care Program

We describe the development and establishment of a breast care program (BCP) with service for rural breast cancer patients. Our program is a comprehensive program serving rural communities in Wisconsin. Our BCP is committed to breast health throughout the continuum from breast cancer risk assessment and prevention, advanced diagnostics, and screening tools to genetic testing and state-of-the-art surgical techniques. To provide the highest level of care, we coordinate a breast care team involving collaboration of multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. Experts from various departments, including radiologists, pathologists, breast surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, genetic counselors, clinical trial specialists, and our breast care navigator, all work together to provide cutting edge cancer treatment and management. Our distinctive BCP allows patients to see multiple providers without having to make multiple appointments and promotes discussion of treatment recommendations and creation of a personalized treatment plan for each patient by a team of specialists.

Improving mammography screening among the medically underserved

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions designed to promote mammography in safety-net settings.

METHODS

A three-arm, quasi-experimental evaluation was conducted among eight federally qualified health clinics in predominately rural Louisiana. Mammography screening efforts included: 1) enhanced care, 2) health literacy-informed education of patients, and 3) education plus nurse support. Outcomes included mammography screening completion within 6 months and incremental cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,181 female patients ages 40 and over who were eligible for routine mammography were recruited. Baseline screening rates were < 10%. Post intervention screening rates were 55.7% with enhanced care, 51.8% with health literacy-informed education and 65.8% with education and nurse support. After adjusting for race, marital status, self-efficacy and literacy, patients receiving health-literacy informed education were not more likely to complete mammographic screening than those receiving enhanced care; those additionally receiving nurse support were 1.37-fold more likely to complete mammographic screening than those receiving the brief education (95% Confidence Interval 1.08-1.74, p = 0.01). The incremental cost per additional women screened was $2,457 for literacy-informed education with nurse support over literacy-informed education alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Mammography rates were increased substantially over existing baseline rates in all three arms with the educational initiative, with nurse support and follow-up being the most effective option. However, it is not likely to be cost-effective or affordable in resource-limited clinics.

Differences in barriers to mammography between rural and urban women

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined differences between rural and urban women in mammography barriers, knowledge, and experiences. Exploring differences can help inform tailored interventions.

METHODS

Women, aged ≥40, who had not been screened in the past 2 years were recruited from eight federally qualified health centers across Louisiana. They were given a structured interview assessing mammography knowledge, beliefs, barriers, experiences, and literacy.

RESULTS

Of the 1189 patients who participated, 65.0% were African American, 61.6% were rural, and 44.0% had low literacy. Contrary to guidelines, most believed mammography should be done annually (74.3%) before age 40 (70.5%). Compared to urban women, rural participants were more likely to believe mammography will find small breast lumps early (34.4% vs. 6.5%, p<0.0001) and strongly disagree that mammography is embarrassing (14.6% vs. 8.4%, p=0.0002) or that they are afraid of finding something wrong (21.2% vs.12.3%, p=0.007). Rural women were more likely to report a physician recommendation for mammography (84.3% vs. 76.5%, p=0.006), but they were less likely to have received education (57.2% vs. 63.6%, p=0.06) or to have ever had a mammogram (74.8% vs. 78.1%, p=0.007). In multivariate analyses controlling for race, literacy, and age, all rural/urban differences remained significant, except for receipt of a mammogram.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participants were unclear about when they should begin mammography. Rural participants reported stronger positive beliefs, higher self-efficacy, fewer barriers, and having a physician recommendation for mammography but were less likely to receive education or screening.

A cluster-randomized trial of a primary care informatics-based system for breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Information technology offers the promise, as yet unfulfilled, of delivering efficient, evidence-based health care.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether a primary care network-based informatics intervention can improve breast cancer screening rates.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomized controlled trial of 12 primary care practices conducted from March 20, 2007 to March 19, 2008.

PATIENTS

Women 42-69 years old with no record of a mammogram in the prior 2 years.

INTERVENTIONS

In intervention practices, a population-based informatics system was implemented that: connected overdue patients to appropriate care providers, presented providers with a Web-based list of their overdue patients in a non-visit-based setting, and enabled "one-click" mammography ordering or documented deferral reasons. Patients selected for mammography received automatically generated letters and follow-up phone calls. All practices had electronic health record reminders about breast cancer screening available during clinical encounters.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of overdue women undergoing mammography at 1-year follow-up.

KEY RESULTS

Baseline mammography rates in intervention and control practices did not differ (79.5% vs 79.3%, p = 0.73). Among 3,054 women in intervention practices and 3,676 women in control practices overdue for mammograms, intervention patients were somewhat younger, more likely to be non-Hispanic white, and have health insurance. Most intervention providers used the system (65 of 70 providers, 92.9%). Action was taken for 2,652 (86.8%) intervention patients [2,274 (74.5%) contacted and 378 (12.4%) deferred]. After 1 year, mammography rates were significantly higher in the intervention arm (31.4% vs 23.3% in control arm, p < 0.001 after adjustment for baseline differences; 8.1% absolute difference, 95% CI 5.1-11.2%). All demographic subgroups benefited from the intervention. Intervention patients completed screening sooner than control patients (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A novel population-based informatics system functioning as part of a non-visit-based care model increased mammography screening rates in intervention practices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT00462891.

Rural primary care providers' perceptions of their role in the breast cancer care continuum

CONTEXT

Rural women in the United States experience disparity in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment when compared to their urban counterparts. Given the 11% chance of lifetime occurrence of breast cancer for women overall, the continuum of breast cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment, and recovery are of legitimate concern to rural women and their primary care providers.

PURPOSE

This analysis describes rural primary care providers' perceptions of the full spectrum of breast cancer screening, treatment, and follow-up care for women patients, and it describes the providers' desired role in the cancer care continuum.

METHOD

Focus group interviews were conducted with primary care providers in 3 federally qualified community health centers serving a lower income, rural population. Focus group participants (N = 26) consisted of 11 physicians, 14 nurse practitioners, and 1 licensed clinical psychologist. Data were generated from audiotaped interviews transcribed verbatim and investigator field notes. Data were analyzed using constant comparison and findings were reviewed with a group of rural health professionals to judge the fit of findings with the emerging coding scheme.

FINDINGS

Provider relationships were characterized as being with women with cancer and comprised an active behind-the-scenes role in supporting their patients through treatment decisions and processes. Three themes emerged from the interview data: Knowing the Patient; Walking Through Treatment With the Patient; and Sending Them Off or Losing the Patient to the System.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings should be a part of professional education for rural practitioners, and mechanisms to support this role should be implemented in practice settings.

Organizational factors and the cancer screening process

Cancer screening is a process of care consisting of several steps and interfaces. This article reviews what is known about the association between organizational factors and cancer screening rates and examines how organizational strategies can address the steps and interfaces of cancer screening in the context of both intraorganizational and interorganizational processes. We reviewed 79 studies assessing the relationship between organizational factors and cancer screening. Screening rates are largely driven by strategies to 1) limit the number of interfaces across organizational boundaries; 2) recruit patients, promote referrals, and facilitate appointment scheduling; and 3) promote continuous patient care. Optimal screening rates can be achieved when health-care organizations tailor strategies to the steps and interfaces in the cancer screening process that are most critical for their organizations, the providers who work within them, and the patients they serve.

Predisposing factors associated with compliance to biennial breast screening among centers with and without nurses

BACKGROUND

Previous research suggests that predisposing factors such as previous screening experience, participation in preventive health behaviors, and knowledge/beliefs about breast cancer and screening influence a woman's decision to make a timely return for a second screen.

METHODS

A stratified random sample of compliers and noncompliers to biennial screening were selected from a cohort of 51,242 women ages 50 to 65 years who had their initial screen at the Ontario Breast Screening Program. In total, 1,901 women were telephone-interviewed. The associations between predisposing factors and compliance were estimated separately for centers with and without nurses using logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics and smoking status.

RESULTS

Women screened at nurse centers were less likely to comply if they thought women should stop having mammograms before age 70 years [odds ratio (OR), 0.39; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.19-0.79], did not consider mammograms very likely to find cancer (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.95), felt their likeliness of getting breast cancer was below average (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.89), or believed a high-fat diet was not an important risk factor for breast cancer (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.97). Women attending nurse centers were significantly more likely to comply if they sometimes had thoughts or worries about developing breast cancer (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses at screening centers may reinforce a woman's knowledge or beliefs about breast cancer or screening and as a result increase their compliance to biennial breast screening.

Mammography screening: views from women and primary care physicians in Crete

Background

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women and a leading cause of death from cancer in women in Europe. Although breast cancer incidence is on the rise worldwide, breast cancer mortality over the past 25 years has been stable or decreasing in some countries and a fall in breast cancer mortality rates in most European countries in the 1990s was reported by several studies, in contrast, in Greece have not reported these favourable trends. In Greece, the age-standardised incidence and mortality rate for breast cancer per 100.000 in 2006 was 81,8 and 21,7 and although it is lower than most other countries in Europe, the fall in breast cancer mortality that observed has not been as great as in other European countries. There is no national strategy for screening in this country. This study reports on the use of mammography among middle-aged women in rural Crete and investigates barriers to mammography screening encountered by women and their primary care physicians.

Methods

Design: Semi-structured individual interviews. Setting and participants: Thirty women between 45–65 years of age, with a mean age of 54,6 years, and standard deviation 6,8 from rural areas of Crete and 28 qualified primary care physicians, with a mean age of 44,7 years and standard deviation 7,0 serving this rural population. Main outcome measure: Qualitative thematic analysis.

Results

Most women identified several reasons for not using mammography. These included poor knowledge of the benefits and indications for mammography screening, fear of pain during the procedure, fear of a serious diagnosis, embarrassment, stress while anticipating the results, cost and lack of physician recommendation. Physicians identified difficulties in scheduling an appointment as one reason women did not use mammography and both women and physicians identified distance from the screening site, transportation problems and the absence of symptoms as reasons for non-use.

Conclusion

Women are inhibited from participating in mammography screening in rural Crete. The provision of more accessible screening services may improve this. However physician recommendation is important in overcoming women's inhibitions. Primary care physicians serving rural areas need to be aware of barriers preventing women from attending mammography screening and provide women with information and advice in a sensitive way so women can make informed decisions regarding breast caner screening.

Genetic counseling forBRCA1/2: A randomized controlled trial of two strategies to facilitate the education and counseling process

Due to the complexity of information surrounding BRCA1/2 counseling and testing and its time consuming nature, efforts to facilitate the genetic counseling and education process are needed. Using a 2 x 2 factorial design, two strategies were examined: a CD-ROM program for patients and a feedback checklist to the genetic counselor on patients' prior misconceptions. A total of 197 women attending a breast and ovarian cancer risk evaluation clinic for BRCA1/2 counseling were randomized into one of four conditions: standard care, CD-ROM only, feedback to counselor only, and both CD-ROM and feedback. Counseling outcomes included face-to-face time with the genetics team, knowledge acquisition, changes in worry about having a gene mutation, and genetic testing decisions. Overall, women who viewed the CD-ROM spent less time with the genetic counselor and were less likely to undergo genetic testing compared to women who did not view the CD-ROM. Feedback to the genetic counselor resulted in greater gains in knowledge of genetics and breast cancer. Among women less worried at baseline, those who viewed the CD-ROM showed no changes in worry following genetic counseling, in contrast to those who did not view the CD-ROM who increased in worry over time. This latter finding raises concerns about the impact of the increased worry on genetic testing decisions. No interaction effects of the two intervention arms were found. The study results support the importance of both strategies as valuable supplements to clinical BRCA1/2 counseling.