Process evaluation in an intervention designed to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening in a VA medical center

From participation to diagnostic assessment: a systematic scoping review of the role of the primary healthcare sector in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program

Primary health care (PHC) plays a vital support role in organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs by encouraging patient participation and ensuring timely referral for diagnostic assessment follow up. A systematic scoping review of the current evidence was conducted to inform strategies that better engage the PHC sector in organised CRC screening programs. Articles published from 2005 to November 2019 were searched across five databases. Evidence was synthesised and interventions that specifically require PHC involvement were mapped to stages of the CRC screening pathway. Fifty-seven unique studies were identified in which patient, provider and system-level interventions align with defined stages of the CRC screening pathway: namely, identifying/reminding patients who have not responded to CRC screening (non-adherence) (n=46) and follow up of a positive screen referral (n=11). Self-management support initiatives (patient level) and improvement initiatives (system level) demonstrate consistent benefits along the CRC screening pathway. Interventions evaluated as part of a quality-improvement process tended to report effectiveness; however, the variation in reporting makes it difficult to determine which elements contributed to the overall study outcomes. To maximise the benefits of population-based screening programs, better integration into existing primary care services can be achieved through targeting preventive and quality care interventions along the entire screening pathway.

Multilevel interventions: measurement and measures

BACKGROUND

Multilevel intervention research holds the promise of more accurately representing real-life situations and, thus, with proper research design and measurement approaches, facilitating effective and efficient resolution of health-care system challenges. However, taking a multilevel approach to cancer care interventions creates both measurement challenges and opportunities.

METHODS

One-thousand seventy two cancer care articles from 2005 to 2010 were reviewed to examine the state of measurement in the multilevel intervention cancer care literature. Ultimately, 234 multilevel articles, 40 involving cancer care interventions, were identified. Additionally, literature from health services, social psychology, and organizational behavior was reviewed to identify measures that might be useful in multilevel intervention research.

RESULTS

The vast majority of measures used in multilevel cancer intervention studies were individual level measures. Group-, organization-, and community-level measures were rarely used. Discussion of the independence, validity, and reliability of measures was scant.

DISCUSSION

Measurement issues may be especially complex when conducting multilevel intervention research. Measurement considerations that are associated with multilevel intervention research include those related to independence, reliability, validity, sample size, and power. Furthermore, multilevel intervention research requires identification of key constructs and measures by level and consideration of interactions within and across levels. Thus, multilevel intervention research benefits from thoughtful theory-driven planning and design, an interdisciplinary approach, and mixed methods measurement and analysis.

Interventions to improve care related to colorectal cancer among racial and ethnic minorities: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature to identify interventions that improve minority health related to colorectal cancer care.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, from 1950 to 2010.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

Interventions in US populations eligible for colorectal cancer screening, and composed of ≥50 % racial/ethnic minorities (or that included a specific sub-analysis by race/ethnicity). All included studies were linked to an identifiable healthcare source. The three authors independently reviewed the abstracts of all the articles and a final list was determined by consensus. All papers were independently reviewed and quality scores were calculated and assigned using the Downs and Black checklist.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included in our final analysis. Patient education involving phone or in-person contact combined with navigation can lead to modest improvements, on the order of 15 percentage points, in colorectal cancer screening rates in minority populations. Provider-directed multi-modal interventions composed of education sessions and reminders, as well as pure educational interventions were found to be effective in raising colorectal cancer screening rates, also on the order of 10 to 15 percentage points. No relevant interventions focusing on post-screening follow up, treatment adherence and survivorship were identified.

LIMITATIONS

This review excluded any intervention studies that were not tied to an identifiable healthcare source. The minority populations in most studies reviewed were predominantly Hispanic and African American, limiting generalizability to other ethnic and minority populations.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Tailored patient education combined with patient navigation services, and physician training in communicating with patients of low health literacy, can modestly improve adherence to CRC screening. The onus is now on researchers to continue to evaluate and refine these interventions and begin to expand them to the entire colon cancer care continuum.

Capsule colonoscopy increases uptake of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Screening colonoscopy effectiveness is hampered by limited adherence by the general population. The present prospective study was performed to evaluate whether adding capsule colonoscopy to the endoscopic screening options increases uptake.

METHODS

Invitation letters were sent to 2150 persons above the age of 55 insured with a German medical insurance company in the area of Rinteln, Lower Saxony with a baseline spontaneous annual screening colonoscopy uptake of 1 %. Both capsule or conventional colonoscopy were offered. Interested persons were given information about the two screening options by four local gastroenterologists and examinations were then performed according to screenees' final choice.

RESULTS

154 persons sought further information, and 34 and 90 underwent conventional and capsule colonoscopy, respectively. Colonoscopy uptake was thus increased by the invitation process by 60 % (1.6 % vs. 1 %; p = 0.075), while the option of capsule endoscopy led to a fourfold increase of screening uptake (4.2 % vs. 1 %, p < 0.001). Despite similar age distribution in both sex groups, uptake in men was significantly higher (5.6 % vs. 2.8 %, p = 002). However, overall adenoma yield was not different in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that offering the option of capsule colonoscopy increases uptake of endoscopic colorectal cancer screening. However, capsule endoscopy sensitivity for adenoma detection needs to be improved.

A computerized intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening for underserved populations: theoretical background and algorithm development

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this exploratory study was to assess factors deemed by patients as "important" as they planned and considered undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, and to use this data to design a computer-delivered intervention to promote screening.

METHODS

Fifty participants 50 years or older, not up-to-date with current recommended CRC screening guidelines, were recruited from a primary care clinic. A semi-structured interview focused on aspects of preparing for colorectal cancer screening was administered; after transcription, researchers used triangulation and consensus to identify relevant themes and concepts.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified that dealt with issues important for both FOBT and colonoscopy planning: personal concerns, reminders, communication with healthcare providers and obtaining test results. FOBT specific themes included: sample collection and return. For colonoscopy screening, themes included: scheduling, intervention questions, colonoscopy preparation, and transportation. These can be classified as barrier, process and accessory themes. The developed computer-administered implementation intentions algorithm addressed all the identified concerns in a planned and sequential manner, in order to facilitate planning for CRC screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that appropriate reminders, explanations of procedures, and patient understanding of temporary life disruptions, help patients develop and accept a detailed screening plan.

A randomized trial comparing the effect of two phone-based interventions on colorectal cancer screening adherence

BACKGROUND

Early-stage diagnosis of colorectal cancer is associated with high survival rates; screening prevalence, however, remains suboptimal.

PURPOSE

This study seeks to test the hypothesis that participants receiving telephone-based tailored education or motivational interviewing had higher colorectal cancer screening completion rates compared to usual care.

METHODS

Primary care patients not adherent with colorectal cancer screening and with no personal or family history of cancer (n = 515) were assigned by block randomization to control (n = 169), tailored education (n = 168), or motivational interview (n = 178). The response rate was 70%; attrition was 24%.

RESULTS

Highest screening occurred in the tailored education group (23.8%, p < .02); participants had 2.2 times the odds of completing a post-intervention colorectal cancer screening than did the control group (AOR = 2.2, CI = 1.2-4.0). Motivational interviewing was not associated with significant increase in post-intervention screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored education showed promise as a feasible strategy to increase colorectal cancer screening.

Effective interventions to facilitate the uptake of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening: an implementation guideline

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. Several high-quality systematic reviews and practice guidelines exist to inform the most effective screening options. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. We developed an implementation guideline to answer the question: What interventions have been shown to increase the uptake of cancer screening by individuals, specifically for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers?

METHODS

A guideline panel was established as part of Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-based Care, and a systematic review of the published literature was conducted. It yielded three foundational systematic reviews and an existing guidance document. We conducted updates of these reviews and searched the literature published between 2004 and 2010. A draft guideline was written that went through two rounds of review. Revisions were made resulting in a final set of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Sixty-six new studies reflecting 74 comparisons met eligibility criteria. They were generally of poor to moderate quality. Using these and the foundational documents, the panel developed a draft guideline. The draft report was well received in the two rounds of review with mean quality scores above four (on a five-point scale) for each of the items. For most of the interventions considered, there was insufficient evidence to support or refute their effectiveness. However, client reminders, reduction of structural barriers, and provision of provider assessment and feedback were recommended interventions to increase screening for at least two of three cancer sites studied. The final guidelines also provide advice on how the recommendations can be used and future areas for research.

CONCLUSION

Using established guideline development methodologies and the AGREE II as our methodological frameworks, we developed an implementation guideline to advise on interventions to increase the rate of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. While advancements have been made in these areas of implementation science, more investigations are warranted.

What implementation interventions increase cancer screening rates? a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. As part of a larger agenda to create an implementation guideline, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate interventions designed to increase the rate of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The interventions considered were: client reminders, client incentives, mass media, small media, group education, one-on-one education, reduction in structural barriers, reduction in out-of-pocket costs, provider assessment and feedback interventions, and provider incentives. Our primary outcome, screening completion, was calculated as the overall median post-intervention absolute percentage point (PP) change in completed screening tests.

METHODS

Our first step was to conduct an iterative scoping review in the research area. This yielded three relevant high-quality systematic reviews. Serving as our evidentiary foundation, we conducted a formal update. Randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized controlled trials, published between 2004 and 2010, were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCHinfo.

RESULTS

The update yielded 66 studies new eligible studies with 74 comparisons. The new studies ranged considerably in quality. Client reminders, small media, and provider audit and feedback appear to be effective interventions to increase the uptake of screening for three cancers. One-on-one education and reduction of structural barriers also appears effective, but their roles with CRC and cervical screening, respectively, are less established. More study is required to assess client incentives, mass media, group education, reduction of out-of-pocket costs, and provider incentive interventions.

CONCLUSION

The new evidence generally aligns with the evidence and conclusions from the original systematic reviews. This review served as the evidentiary foundation for an implementation guideline. Poor reporting, lack of precision and consistency in defining operational elements, and insufficient consideration of context and differences among populations are areas for additional research.

The Genome-based Knowledge Management in Cycles model: a complex adaptive systems framework for implementation of genomic applications

The main mission of the Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network™ is to advance collaborative efforts involving partners from across the public health sector to realize the promise of genomics in healthcare and disease prevention. We introduce a new framework that supports the Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network mission and leverages the characteristics of the complex adaptive systems approach. We call this framework the Genome-based Knowledge Management in Cycles model (G-KNOMIC). G-KNOMIC proposes that the collaborative work of multidisciplinary teams utilizing genome-based applications will enhance translating evidence-based genomic findings by creating ongoing knowledge management cycles. Each cycle consists of knowledge synthesis, knowledge evaluation, knowledge implementation and knowledge utilization. Our framework acknowledges that all the elements in the knowledge translation process are interconnected and continuously changing. It also recognizes the importance of feedback loops, and the ability of teams to self-organize within a dynamic system. We demonstrate how this framework can be used to improve the adoption of genomic technologies into practice using two case studies of genomic uptake.

Evaluating the impact of an educational intervention to increase CRC screening rates in the African American community: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Despite the acknowledged importance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and its proven prognostic benefit, African American men and women simultaneously possess the highest rates of CRC-related incidence and mortality (Swan et al. in Cancer 97(6):1528-1540, 2003) and lowest screening rates in the United States (Polite et al. in Med Clin N Am 89(4):771-793, 2005). Effective, targeted interventions that promote CRC screening for this community are therefore critical. The current study evaluated the impact of a print-based educational intervention on screening behavior and associated patient-based factors, including cancer-related knowledge, fatalism, worry, and decisional balance (pros-cons).

METHODS

One hundred and eighteen individuals (mean age = 56.08, SD = 5.58) who had not undergone screening were recruited from two health clinics in New York City. Each participant received educational print materials regarding the need for screening, the process of undergoing screening, and the benefits of regular CRC screening.

RESULTS

One in four individuals had undergone post-intervention screening at a three-month follow-up. Whereas all participants reported a decrease in cancer-related worry (p < .05), it was a decrease in fatalism (p < .05) and an increase in decisional balance (p < .05) that was associated with post-intervention screening behavior.

DISCUSSION

These preliminary results suggest that fatalistic beliefs and an individual's assessment of the benefits and barriers of screening may be critical in the decision to undergo CRC screening. Future interventions to increase CRC-screening rates for this community may be improved by focusing on these patient-based factors.

How equitable are colorectal cancer screening programs which include FOBTs? A review of qualitative and quantitative studies

OBJECTIVE

To review published literature on the equity of participation in colorectal cancer screening amongst different population subgroups, in addition to identifying factors identified as barriers and facilitators to equitable screening. Studies were included in the review if they included FOBT as at least one of the screening tests.

METHOD

Relevant published articles were identified through systematic electronic searches of selected databases and the examination of the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Studies of the association with colorectal cancer screening test participation, barriers to equitable participation in screening, and studies examining interventional actions to facilitate screening test participation were included. Data extraction and analysis was undertaken using an approach to the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies called Realist Review.

RESULTS

Sixty-three articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. SES status, ethnicity, age and gender have been found as predictors of colorectal cancer screening test participation. This review also found that the potential for equitable cancer screening test participation may be hindered by access barriers which vary amongst population sub-groups.

CONCLUSION

This review provides evidence of horizontal inequity in colorectal cancer screening test participation, but limited understanding of the mechanism by which it is sustained, and few evidence-based solutions.

[Factors associated with gastric cancer screening of Koreans based on a socio-ecological model]

OBJECTIVES

We measured behavioral factors associated with Koreans receiving gastric cancer screening based on a socio-ecological model, in part to develop strategies to improve cancer screening rates.

METHODS

A telephone survey was conducted with 2,576 people chosen through stratified random sampling from April 1--May 31, 2004. Collected information included gastric cancer screening, socio-demographic factors, and socio-ecological factors at intrapersonal, interpersonal, community, and public policy levels.

RESULTS

Among 985 survey respondents (380 men and 605 women), 402 had received gastric cancer screening. Logistic analysis was performed to compare those screened and unscreened. 'Age' was the only demographic factor that showed a statistically significant association with getting screening. People in their fifties (OR=1.731, 95% CI=1.190-2.520) and sixties (OR=2.098, 95% CI=1.301-3.385) showed a higher likelihood of getting screened, compared to those in the forties. 'Accessibility to a medical institution' was a significant factor related to having gastric cancer screening at the intrapersonal level. At the interpersonal level, recommendations by family members to be screened and a family practice of routine cancer screening were significantly related. People with frequent education about cancer screening or with stronger social feelings that cancer screening is necessary also demonstrated significantly higher tendencies to be screened.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, a socio-ecological model seems appropriate for explaining gastric cancer screening behavior and associated factors. Health planners should develop integrated strategies to improve cancer screening rates based on socio-ecological factors, especially at the interpersonal and community levels.