Cost of Increasing Years-of-Life-Gained (YLG) Using Fecal Immunochemical Testing as a Population-Level Screening Model in a Rural Appalachian Population

Increasing Fecal Immunochemical Test Return Rates by Implementing Effective “Reminder to Complete Kit” Communication With Participants: A Quality Improvement Study

Background

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the United States is increasing. It remains the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States for men and women combined, mainly due to underutilization of screening methods. The American Cancer Society now recommends that adults aged 45 years and older with an average risk of CRC undergo regular screening with either a high-sensitivity stool-based test or structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. The primary objective of this quality improvement project was to determine if reminder methods, such as telephone or letter reminders, increased the return rate of fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for CRC screening.

Methodology

At public outreach events and daily clinics in the West Texas Panhandle area, participants in the GET FIT program were provided with FIT kits after completing the education on CRC. Participants who fit the inclusion criteria and had received a FIT kit from the program were included. They were instructed on how to perform the test and mail it back. Participants who did not return the completed kits within two weeks were reminded either through (1) a reminder letter, (2) telephone, or (3) a combination of letter reminder and telephone call every two weeks (±three days) for 60 days or five attempts to contact. We de-identified and analyzed the FIT kit return data from April-September 2019 before analyzing these reminder methods. We then calculated the change in return rates from October 2019 to March 2020. Our goal was to increase the FIT return rates by 25% compared to the baseline return rate.

Results

The pre-intervention return rate of kits for April-September 2019 was 61.52%, and the post-intervention return rate for October 2019-March 2020 was 71.85%. This rate was equal to an approximately 16.79% increase in return rates that was statistically significant (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference in the method of reminder between the two groups, but no significant differences in gender and race/ethnicity between the two groups. There was a significant difference in return rates between race/ethnicities in the October-March cohort with black and Hispanic participants having the highest return rates of 82.3% and 77.25%, respectively.

Conclusions

FIT remains one of the primary options for CRC screening. Due to its lower cost and noninvasiveness, FIT was offered to patients at average risk. We demonstrated an increase in return rates, although we did not meet our target return rate goal for this project. This study was limited due to a gradual increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and a subsequent shift and conversation of ongoing research into COVID-19.