Health Equity and Colorectal Cancer Awareness: a Community Health Educator Initiative

Disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality persist in rural and underserved communities. Our Community Outreach and Engagement (COE) activities are grounded in a bi-directional Community-to-Bench model in which the National Outreach Network Community Health Educator (NON CHE) Screen to Save (S2S) initiative was implemented. In this study, we assessed the impact of the NON CHE S2S in rural and underserved communities. Descriptive and comparative analyses were used to examine the role of the NON CHE S2S on CRC knowledge and CRC screening intent. Data included demographics, current CRC knowledge, awareness, and future CRC health plans. A multivariate linear regression was fit to survey scores for CRC knowledge. The NON CHE S2S engaged 441 participants with 170 surveys completed. The difference in participants' CRC knowledge before and after the NON CHE S2S intervention had an overall mean of 0.92 with a standard deviation of 2.56. At baseline, White participants had significantly higher CRC knowledge scores, correctly answering 1.94 (p = 0.007) more questions on average than Black participants. After the NON CHE S2S intervention, this difference was not statistically significant. Greater than 95% of participants agreed that the NON CHE S2S sessions impacted their intent to get screened for CRC. Equity of access to health information and the health care system can be achieved with precision public health strategies. The COE bi-directional Community-to-Bench model facilitated community connections through the NON CHE and increased awareness of CRC risk reduction, screening, treatment, and research. The NON CHE combined with S2S is a powerful tool to engage communities with the greatest health care needs and positively impact an individual's intent to "get screened" for CRC.

A qualitative exploration of contextual factors that influence dissemination and implementation of evidence-based chronic disease prevention across four countries

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the contextual factors affecting the uptake of evidence-based chronic disease interventions in the United States and in other countries. This study sought to better understand the contextual similarities and differences influencing the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based chronic disease prevention (EBCDP) in Australia, Brazil, China, and the United States.

METHODS

Between February and July 2015, investigators in each country conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews (total N = 50) with chronic disease prevention practitioners, using interview guides that covered multiple domains (e.g., use of and access to EBCDP interventions, barriers and facilitators to the implementation of EBCDP interventions).

RESULTS

Practitioners across the four countries reported only a few programmatic areas in which repositories of EBCDP interventions were used within their workplace. Across countries, academic journals were the most frequently cited channels for accessing EBCDP interventions, though peers were commonly cited as the most useful. Lack of time and heavy workload were salient personal barriers among practitioners in Australia and the United States, while lack of expertise in developing and implementing EBCDP interventions was more pertinent among practitioners from Brazil and China. Practitioners in all four countries described an organizational culture that was unsupportive of EBCDP. Practitioners in Brazil, China and the United States cited an inadequate number of staff support to implement EBCDP interventions. A few practitioners in Australia and China cited lack of access to evidence. Partnerships were emphasized as key facilitators to implementing EBCDP interventions across all countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is novel in its cross-country qualitative exploration of multilevel constructs of EBCDP dissemination and implementation. The interviews produced rich findings about many contextual similarities and differences with EBCDP that can inform both cross-country and country-specific research and practice to address barriers and improve EBCDP implementation among the four countries long-term.

Promoting state health department evidence-based cancer and chronic disease prevention: a multi-phase dissemination study with a cluster randomized trial component

Background

Cancer and other chronic diseases reduce quality and length of life and productivity, and represent a significant financial burden to society. Evidence-based public health approaches to prevent cancer and other chronic diseases have been identified in recent decades and have the potential for high impact. Yet, barriers to implement prevention approaches persist as a result of multiple factors including lack of organizational support, limited resources, competing emerging priorities and crises, and limited skill among the public health workforce. The purpose of this study is to learn how best to promote the adoption of evidence based public health practice related to chronic disease prevention.

Methods/design

This paper describes the methods for a multi-phase dissemination study with a cluster randomized trial component that will evaluate the dissemination of public health knowledge about evidence-based prevention of cancer and other chronic diseases. Phase one involves development of measures of practitioner views on and organizational supports for evidence-based public health and data collection using a national online survey involving state health department chronic disease practitioners. In phase two, a cluster randomized trial design will be conducted to test receptivity and usefulness of dissemination strategies directed toward state health department chronic disease practitioners to enhance capacity and organizational support for evidence-based chronic disease prevention. Twelve state health department chronic disease units will be randomly selected and assigned to intervention or control. State health department staff and the university-based study team will jointly identify, refine, and select dissemination strategies within intervention units. Intervention (dissemination) strategies may include multi-day in-person training workshops, electronic information exchange modalities, and remote technical assistance. Evaluation methods include pre-post surveys, structured qualitative phone interviews, and abstraction of state-level chronic disease prevention program plans and progress reports.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01978054.

Translating evidence into practice in low resource settings: cervical cancer screening tests are only part of the solution in rural India

BACKGROUND

The majority of women in rural India have poor or no access to cervical cancer screening services, although one-quarter of all cervical cancers in the world occur there. Several large trials have proven the efficacy of low-tech cervical cancer screening methods in the Indian context but none have documented the necessary components and processes of implementing this evidence in a low-resource setting.

METHODS

This paper discusses a feasible model of implementation of cervical cancer screening programme in low-resource settings developed through a pilot research project carried out in rural Tamilnadu, India. The programme used visual inspection of cervix after acetic acid application (VIA) as a screening tool, nurses in the primary care centres as the primary screeners and peer educators within Self-Help Women groups to raise community awareness.

RESULTS

The uptake of screening was initially low despite the access to a screening programme. However, the programme witnessed an incremental increase in the number of women accessing screening with increasing community awareness.

CONCLUSIONS

The investigators recommend 4 key components to programme implementation in low-resource setting: 1) Evidence-based, cost-effective test and treatment available within the reach of the community; 2) Appropriate referral pathways; 3) Skilled health workers and necessary equipment; and 4) Optimisation of health literacy, beliefs, attitudes of the community.