Academic detailing to increase colorectal cancer screening by primary care practices in Appalachian Pennsylvania

Primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs: a systematic narrative review

AIM

To provide a systematic synthesis of primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs.

BACKGROUND

Globally, population-based cancer screening programs (bowel, breast, and cervical) have sub-optimal participation rates. Primary healthcare workers (PHCWs) have an important role in facilitating a patient's decision to screen; however, barriers exist to their engagement. It remains unclear how to best optimize the role of PHCWs to increase screening participation.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted from January 2010 until November 2023 in the following databases: Medline (OVID), EMBASE, and CINAHL. Data extraction, quality assessment, and synthesis were conducted. Studies were separated by whether they assessed the effect of a single-component or multi-component intervention and study type.

FINDINGS

Forty-nine studies were identified, of which 36 originated from the USA. Fifteen studies were investigations of single-component interventions, and 34 studies were of multi-component interventions. Interventions with a positive effect on screening participation were predominantly multi-component, and most included combinations of audit and feedback, provider reminders, practice-facilitated assessment and improvement, and patient education across all screening programs. Regarding bowel screening, provision of screening kits at point-of-care was an effective strategy to increase participation. Taking a 'whole-of-practice approach' and identifying a 'practice champion' were found to be contextual factors of effective interventions.The findings suggest that complex interventions comprised of practitioner-focused and patient-focused components are required to increase cancer screening participation in primary care settings. This study provides novel understanding as to what components and contextual factors should be included in primary care practice-based interventions.

Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) in Appalachia: protocol for a group randomized, delayed intervention trial

Appalachian regions of Kentucky and Ohio are hotspots for colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality in the USA. Screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality; however, screening uptake is needed, especially in these underserved geographic areas. Implementation science offers strategies to address this challenge. The aim of the current study was to conduct multi-site, transdisciplinary research to evaluate and improve CRC screening processes using implementation science strategies. The study consists of two phases (Planning and Implementation). In the Planning Phase, a multilevel assessment of 12 health centers (HC) (one HC from each of the 12 Appalachian counties) was conducted by interviewing key informants, creating community profiles, identifying HC and community champions, and performing HC data inventories. Two designated pilot HCs chose CRC evidence-based interventions to adapt and implement at each level (i.e., patient, provider, HC, and community) with evaluation relative to two matched control HCs. During the Implementation Phase, study staff will repeat the rollout process in HC and community settings in a randomized, staggered fashion in the remaining eight counties/HCs. Evaluation will include analyses of electronic health record data and provider and county surveys. Rural HCs have been reluctant to participate in research because of concerns about capacity; however, this project should demonstrate that research does not need to be burdensome and can adapt to local needs and HC abilities. If effective, this approach could be disseminated to HC and community partners throughout Appalachia to encourage the uptake of effective interventions to reduce the burden of CRC.

Synthesis of Existent Oncology Curricula for Primary Care Providers: A Scoping Review With a Global Equity Lens

PURPOSE

Global increases in cancer, coupled with a shortage of cancer specialists, has led to an increasing role for primary care providers (PCP) in cancer care. This review aimed to examine all extant cancer curricula for PCPs and to analyze the motivations for curriculum development.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from inception to October 13, 2021, with no language restrictions. The initial search yielded 11,162 articles and 10,902 articles underwent title and abstract review. After full-text review, 139 articles were included. Numeric and thematic analyses were conducted and education programs were evaluated using Bloom's taxonomy.

RESULTS

Most curricula were developed in high-income countries (HICs), with 58% in the United States. Cancer-specific curricula focused on HIC priority cancers, such as skin/melanoma, and did not represent the global cancer burden. Most (80%) curricula were developed for staff physicians and 73% focused on cancer screening. More than half (57%) of programs were delivered in person, with a shift toward online delivery over time. Less than half (46%) of programs were codeveloped with PCPs and 34% did not involve PCPs in the program design and development. Curricula were primarily developed to improve cancer knowledge, and 72 studies assessed multiple outcome measures. No studies included the top two levels of Bloom's taxonomy of learning (evaluating; creating).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first review to assess the current state of cancer curricula for PCPs with a global focus. This review shows that extant curricula are primarily developed in HICs, do not represent the global cancer burden, and focus on cancer screening. This review lays a foundation to advance the cocreation of curricula that are aligned to the global cancer burden.

Cancer screening educational interventions in rural and farmworker communities: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

Men and women living in rural communities of the United States (US) are less likely than those in urban or suburban communities to be up to date with cancer screenings. Delayed screening contributes to later stage at diagnosis and higher cancer mortality for individuals living in rural areas. These effects may be compounded in some rural subpopulations (e.g. migrant and seasonal farmworkers). This systematic review examines educational interventions aimed at increasing colorectal, breast, prostate, oral, and/or cervical cancer screening in the rural US, with special consideration for the farmworker subpopulation.

DESIGN

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, our systematic literature review employed the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and Web of Science. Search terms included, but were not limited to 'rural,' 'cancer screening,' 'farmworker,' and 'cancer prevention.' Eligible studies featured an educational intervention implemented in agricultural or rural US settings with a cancer screening behavioral outcome, male and/or female participants, and were published in English between 2002 and 2020. Article screening and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles were eligible. Of the six studies focused on the farmworker population (n=2,732), 61.75% of participants reported Hispanic ethnicity. Of the sixteen studies on unspecified rural communities reporting participant race/ethnicity (n=10,442), 39.29% reported Black/African American race. Efficacious interventions included culturally-targeted educational materials, lay health advisors (LHAs), and components that addressed practical barriers (e.g. financial or logistical).

CONCLUSION

Results demonstrate the value of LHAs and targeted education to increase screening for multiple cancer types in rural communities. Prospective research should incorporate and facilitate access to screening and provider-level and/or organizational-level interventions to increase overall impact.

ABBREVIATIONS

HPV: human papillomavirus; LHA: lay health advisors; MeSH: Medical Subject Headings; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; RCT: randomized controlled trial; US: United States.

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.

Improving Cancer Screening Rates in Primary Care via Practice Facilitation and Academic Detailing: A Multi-PBRN Quality Improvement Project

PURPOSE

In the United States, cancer screening rates are often below national targets. This project implemented practice facilitation and academic detailing aimed at increasing breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates in safety-net primary care practices.

METHODS

Three practice-based research networks across western and central New York State partnered to provide quality improvement strategies on breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Pre/postintervention screening rates for all participating practices were collected annually, as were means across all practices over 7 years. Simple ordinary least squares linear regression was used to calculate the trend for each cancer type and test for statistical significance (ie, P≤0.05), using the ordinal time point as a fixed effect.

RESULTS

An overall increase in mean screening rates was seen over the duration of this project for colorectal (24.6% preintervention to 48.0% in year 7 of intervention; P<0.001) and breast cancer (37.0% preintervention to 48.6% in year 7; P=0.460). Mean cervical cancer screening rates decreased (35.5% preintervention to 31.4% in year 7; P=0.209). Success in increasing screening rates varied across regions of New York State.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice facilitation and academic detailing were successful in significantly increasing, on average, colorectal cancer screening rate. Cervical cancer screening showed an overall decrease, likely due to difficulties for primary care practices in tracking and implementation, as many patients seek this service at outside gynecology facilities. Regional differences, guideline changes, and practice reorganization each may have played a part in observed trends. A standardization of queries being used to pull screening rates is an important step in increasing the reliability of these data.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Cancer Screening Interventions Targeting Appalachian Populations: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Appalachian residents have higher cancer prevalence and invasive cancer incidence in almost all cancer types relative to non-Appalachian residents. Public health interventions have been carried out to increase preventive cancer screening participation. However, no studies have evaluated the effectiveness of existing interventions targeting cancer screening uptake in this high-risk population. The main objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing uptake and/or continuing participation in screened cancers (breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate) in Appalachia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases and gray literature using a combination of MeSH and free-text search terms related to breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer; mass screening; health promotion; and Appalachia. We identified 3,014 articles of which 15 articles were included. We assessed methodological quality using validated tools and analyzed findings using narrative synthesis.

FINDINGS

Fifteen studies reported uptake and/or continued participation in screening interventions; these focused on cervical (n = 7), colorectal (n = 5), breast (n = 2), and lung (n = 1) cancers in Appalachia. Interventions included diverse components: mass media campaigns, community outreach events, community health workers, interpersonal counseling, and educational materials. We found that multi-strategy interventions had higher screening uptake relative to interventions employing 1 intervention strategy. Studies that targeted noncompliant populations and leveraged existing community-based organization partnerships had a substantial increase in screening participation versus others.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need for further research and implementation of effective cancer prevention and screening interventions to reduce disparities in cancer morbidity and mortality in Appalachian populations.

Place, Power, and Premature Mortality: A Rapid Scoping Review on the Health of Women in Appalachia

OBJECTIVE

Appalachian women continue to die younger than in other US regions. We performed a rapid scoping review to summarize women's health research in Appalachia from 2000 to 2019, including health topics, study populations, theoretical frameworks, methods, and findings.

DATA SOURCE

We searched bibliographic databases (eg, PubMed, PsycINFO, Google Scholar) for literature focusing on women's health in Appalachia.

STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Included articles were: (1) on women's health in Appalachia; (2) published January 2000 to June 2019; (3) peer-reviewed; and (4) written in English. We excluded studies without reported data findings.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two coders reviewed articles for descriptive information to create summary tables comparing variables of interest.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Two coders co-reviewed a sub-sample to ensure consensus and refine data charting categories. We categorized major findings across the social-ecological framework.

RESULTS

A search of nearly 2 decades of literature revealed 81 articles, which primarily focused on cancer disparities (49.4%) and prenatal/pregnancy outcomes (23.5%). Many of these research studies took place in Central Appalachia (eg, 42.0% in Kentucky) with reproductive or middle-aged women (82.7%). Half of the studies employed quantitative methods, and half used qualitative methods, with few mixed method or community-engaged approaches (3.7%). Nearly half (40.7%) did not specify a theoretical framework. Findings included complex multi-level factors with few articles exploring the co-occurrence of factors across multiple levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies should: 1) systematically include Appalachian women at various life stages from under-represented sub-regions; 2) expand the use of rigorous methods and specified theoretical frameworks to account for complex interactions of social-ecological factors; and 3) build upon existing community assets to improve health in this vulnerable population.

Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol

Background

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation.

Methods

This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase.

Discussion

There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study.

Trial registration

This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04514341) on 14 August 2020.

Leveraging Electronic Health Records Data for Enhanced Colorectal Cancer Screening Efforts

Introduction

Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the United States for men and women combined. While the current threat of disease nationally is significant, the majority of colorectal cancer cases and deaths could be prevented through established screening tests and guidelines. Within the Appalachian region and West Virginia in particular, colorectal cancer is a significant public health problem. A more systematic, comprehensive approach to preventing and controlling cancer is essential.

Methods

Through the West Virginia Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening, primary care systems across the state received data-informed practice facilitation designed to increase screening rates.

Results

Year-1 cohort health systems had an overall baseline screening rate of 28.4% during calendar year 2014. This rate increased and remained steady during the three follow-up measurement time periods, with a rate of 49.5% during calendar year 2018. This increase is notably greater than comparable health systems not part of the initiative.

Implications

Lessons learned in increasing colorectal cancer screening rates are applicable to other priority health needs as well.

Identifying Communication Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence among Appalachian Kentuckians

Utilizing data from 40 in-depth interviews, this article identifies both barriers and facilitators to colorectal screening guideline adherence among Appalachian Kentucky adults recruited through a community-based research network. Key findings identify (a) varying levels of knowledge about screening guidelines, (b) reticence to engage in screening processes, and (c) nuanced communication with healthcare providers and family members regarding screening adherence. What participants knew about the screening process was often derived from personal stories or recalled stories from family members about their screening experiences. Reticence to engage in screening processes reflected reports of cumbersome preparation, privacy issues, embarrassment, medical mistrust, fear of receiving a cancer diagnosis, and lack of symptoms. Participants cited many ways to enhance patient-centered communication, and the findings from this study have implications for health communication message design and communication strategies for healthcare practices in Appalachian Kentucky clinics.

Use of Quality Improvement Strategies Among Small to Medium-Size US Primary Care Practices

PURPOSE

Improving primary care quality is a national priority, but little is known about the extent to which small to medium-size practices use quality improvement (QI) strategies to improve care. We examined variations in use of QI strategies among 1,181 small to medium-size primary care practices engaged in a national initiative spanning 12 US states to improve quality of care for heart health and assessed factors associated with those variations.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, practice characteristics were assessed by surveying practice leaders. Practice use of QI strategies was measured by the validated Change Process Capability Questionnaire (CPCQ) Strategies Scale (scores range from -28 to 28, with higher scores indicating more use of QI strategies). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the association between practice characteristics and the CPCQ strategies score.

RESULTS

The mean CPCQ strategies score was 9.1 (SD = 12.2). Practices that participated in accountable care organizations and those that had someone in the practice to configure clinical quality reports from electronic health records (EHRs), had produced quality reports, or had discussed clinical quality data during meetings had higher CPCQ strategies scores. Health system-owned practices and those experiencing major disruptive changes, such as implementing a new EHR system or clinician turnover, had lower CPCQ strategies scores.

CONCLUSION

There is substantial variation in the use of QI strategies among small to medium-size primary care practices across 12 US states. Findings suggest that practices may need external support to strengthen their ability to do QI and to be prepared for new payment and delivery models.

Physician Intervention and Chinese Americans' Colorectal Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a cluster-randomized trial evaluating an intervention that trained Chinese-American primary care physicians to increase their Chinese patients' colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

Twenty-five physicians (13 randomized to the intervention arm and 12 to the control arm) and 479 of their patients (aged 50-75 and nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines) were enrolled. The intervention, guided by Social Cognitive Theory, included a communication guide and 2 in-office training sessions to enhance physicians' efficacy in com- municating CRC screening with patients. Patients' CRC screening rates (trial outcome) and rating of physician communication before intervention and at 12-month follow-up were assessed. Intention-to-treat analysis for outcome evaluation was conducted.

RESULTS

Screening rates were slightly higher in the intervention vs. the control arm (24.4% vs. 17.7%, p = .24). In post hoc analyses, intervention arm patients who perceived better communication were more likely to be screened than those who did not (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.15). This relationship was not seen in the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS

This physician-focused intervention had small, non-significant effects in increasing Chinese patients' CRC screening rates. Physician communication appeared to explain intervention efficacy. More intensive interventions are needed to enhance Chinese patients' CRC screening.

Using Practice Facilitation to Increase Rates of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers, North Carolina, 2012-2013: Feasibility, Facilitators, and Barriers

Introduction

Practice facilitation involves trained individuals working with practice staff to conduct quality improvement activities and support delivery of evidence-based clinical services. We examined the feasibility of using practice facilitation to assist federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in North Carolina.

Methods

The intervention consisted of 12 months of facilitation in 3 FQHCs. We conducted chart audits to obtain data on changes in documented recommendation for colorectal cancer screening and completed screening. Key informant interviews provided qualitative data on barriers to and facilitators of implementing office systems.

Results

Overall, the percentage of eligible patients with a documented colorectal cancer screening recommendation increased from 15% to 29% (P < .001). The percentage of patients up to date with colorectal cancer screening rose from 23% to 34% (P = .03). Key informants in all 3 clinics said the implementation support from the practice facilitator was critical for initiating or improving office systems and that modifying the electronic medical record was the biggest challenge and most time-consuming aspect of implementing office systems changes. Other barriers were staff turnover and reluctance on the part of local gastroenterology practices to perform free or low-cost diagnostic colonoscopies for uninsured or underinsured patients.

Conclusion

Practice facilitation is a feasible, acceptable, and promising approach for supporting universal colorectal cancer screening in FQHCs. A larger-scale study is warranted.

A national evaluation of a dissemination and implementation initiative to enhance primary care practice capacity and improve cardiovascular disease care: the ESCALATES study protocol

Background

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) launched the EvidenceNOW Initiative to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) preventive care in smaller primary care practices. AHRQ funded eight grantees (seven regional Cooperatives and one independent national evaluation) to participate in EvidenceNOW. The national evaluation examines quality improvement efforts and outcomes for more than 1500 small primary care practices (restricted to those with fewer than ten physicians per clinic). Examples of external support include practice facilitation, expert consultation, performance feedback, and educational materials and activities. This paper describes the study protocol for the EvidenceNOW national evaluation, which is called Evaluating System Change to Advance Learning and Take Evidence to Scale (ESCALATES).

Methods

This prospective observational study will examine the portfolio of EvidenceNOW Cooperatives using both qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data include: online implementation diaries, observation and interviews at Cooperatives and practices, and systematic assessment of context from the perspective of Cooperative team members. Quantitative data include: practice-level performance on clinical quality measures (aspirin prescribing, blood pressure and cholesterol control, and smoking cessation; ABCS) collected by Cooperatives from electronic health records (EHRs); practice and practice member surveys to assess practice capacity and other organizational and structural characteristics; and systematic tracking of intervention delivery. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods analyses will be conducted to examine how Cooperatives organize to provide external support to practices, to compare effectiveness of the dissemination and implementation approaches they implement, and to examine how regional variations and other organization and contextual factors influence implementation and effectiveness.

Discussion

ESCALATES is a national evaluation of an ambitious large-scale dissemination and implementation effort focused on transforming smaller primary care practices. Insights will help to inform the design of national health care practice extension systems aimed at supporting practice transformation efforts in the USA.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT02560428 (09/21/15)

A Randomized Trial to Compare Alternative Educational Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Hard-to-Reach Urban Minority Population with Health Insurance

This randomized controlled trial assessed different educational approaches for increasing colorectal cancer screening uptake in a sample of primarily non-US born urban minority individuals, over aged 50, with health insurance, and out of compliance with screening guidelines. In one group, participants were mailed printed educational material (n = 180); in a second, participants' primary care physicians received academic detailing to improve screening referral and follow-up practices (n = 185); in a third, physicians received academic detailing and participants received tailored telephone education (n = 199). Overall, 21.5% of participants (n = 121) received appropriate screening within one year of randomization. There were no statistically significant pairwise differences between groups in screening rate. Among those 60 years of age or older, however, the detailing plus telephone education group had a higher screening rate than the print group (27.3 vs. 7.7%, p = .02). Different kinds of interventions will be required to increase colorectal cancer screening among the increasingly small population segment that remains unscreened. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02392143.

Examining Factors Influencing Colorectal Cancer Screening of Rural Nebraskans Using Data from Clinics Participating in an Accountable Care Organization: A Study Protocol

Background: Although mortality rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) can be significantly reduced through increased screening, rural communities are still experiencing lower rates of screening compared to urban counterparts. Understanding and eliminating barriers to cancer screening will decrease cancer burden and lead to substantial gains in quality and quantity of life for rural populations. However, existing studies have shown inconsistent findings and fail to address how contextual and provider-level factors impact CRC screening in addition to individual-level factors. 

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to examine multi-level factors related to CRC screening, and providers’ perception of barriers and facilitators of CRC screening in rural patients cared for by accountable care organization (ACO) clinics.

Methods/Design: This is a convergent mixed method design. For the quantitative component, multiple data sources, such as electronic health records (EHRs), Area Resource File (ARF), and provider survey data, will be used to examine patient-, provider-, clinic-, and county-level factors. About 21,729 rural patients aged between 50 and 75 years who visited the participating ACO clinics in the past 12 months are included in the quantitative analysis. The qualitative methods include semi-structured in-depth interviews with healthcare professionals in selected rural clinics. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be merged for result interpretation. Quantitative data identifies “what” factors influence CRC screening, while qualitative data explores “how” these factors interact with CRC screening. The study setting is 10 ACO clinics located in nine rural Nebraska counties.

Discussion: This will be the first study examining multi-level factors related to CRC screening in the new healthcare delivery system (i.e., ACO clinics) in rural communities. The study findings will enhance our understanding of how the ACO model, particularly in rural areas, interacts with provider- and patient-level factors influencing the CRC screening rate of rural patients.

Understanding Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in Kentucky

Introduction

Colorectal cancer screening rates have increased significantly in Kentucky, from 35% in 1999 to 66% in 2012. A continued improvement in screening requires identification of existing barriers and implementation of interventions to address barriers.

Methods

The state of Kentucky added a question to the 2012 Kentucky Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey for respondents aged 50 years or older who answered no to ever having been screened for colorectal cancer by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy to assess the reasons why respondents had not been screened. Combined responses constituted 4 categories: attitudes and beliefs, health care provider and health care systems barriers, cost, and other. Prevalence estimates for barriers were calculated by using raking weights and were stratified by race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, and health insurance coverage. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios for barriers to screening.

Results

The most common barriers in all areas were related to attitudes and beliefs, followed by health care provider and systems, and cost. Non-Hispanic whites and respondents with more than a high school education were more likely to choose attitudes and beliefs as a barrier than were non-Hispanic blacks and those with less than a high school education. Respondents with low incomes and with no insurance were significantly more likely to select cost as a barrier. No significant associations were observed between demographic variables and the selection of a health care provider and a health care system.

Conclusion

Barriers related to education, race/ethnicity, income, and insurance coverage should be considered when designing interventions. Expansion of Medicaid and implementation of the Affordable Care Act in Kentucky could have an impact on reducing these barriers.

Promoting Chinese-speaking primary care physicians' communication with immigrant patients about colorectal cancer screening: a cluster randomized trial design

Chinese Americans underutilize colorectal cancer screening. This study evaluated a physician-based intervention guided by social cognitive theory (SCT) to inform future research involving minority physicians and patients. Twenty-five Chinese-speaking primary care physicians were randomized into intervention or usual care arms. The intervention included two 45-minute in-office training sessions paired with a dual-language communication guide detailing strategies in addressing Chinese patients' screening barriers. Physicians' feedback on the intervention, their performance data during training, and pre-post intervention survey data were collected and analyzed. Most physicians (~85%) liked the intervention materials but ~84% spent less than 20 minutes reading the guide and only 46% found the length of time for in-office training acceptable. Despite this, the intervention increased physicians' perceived communication self-efficacy with patients (p<.01). This study demonstrated the feasibility of enrolling and intervening with minority physicians. Time constraints in primary care practice should be considered in the design and implementation of interventions.

Factors influencing participation in colorectal screening

Participation of the target population in coloretal screening is generally low. In addition to demographic and socio-economic factors, the health care system and- in particular – family doctors play an important role. Further, the rate of participation is influenced by psychological, cognitive and behavioural factors, too. The paper analyses factors related to colorectal screening behaviour and potential interventions designed to screening uptake. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(27), 1051–1056.

Correlates of colorectal cancer screening among residents of Ohio Appalachia

There is an excess burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Appalachian region of the United States, which could be reduced by increased uptake of CRC screening tests. Thus, we examined correlates of screening among Appalachian residents at average-risk for CRC. Using a population-based sample, we conducted interviews with and obtained medical records of Appalachian Ohio residents 51-75 years between September 2009 and April 2010. Using multivariable logistic regression, we identified correlates of being within CRC screening guidelines by medical records. About half of participants were within CRC screening guidelines. Participants who were older (OR = 1.04, 95 % CI 1.01, 1.07), had higher income ($30,000-$60,000, OR = 1.92, 95 % CI 1.29, 2.86; ≥$60,000, OR = 1.80, 95 % CI 1.19, 2.72), a primary care provider (OR = 4.22, 95 % CI 1.33, 13.39), a recent check-up (OR = 2.37, 95 % CI 1.12, 4.99), had been encouraged to be screened (OR = 1.57, 95 % CI 1.11, 2.22), had been recommended by their doctor to be screened (OR = 6.68, 95 % CI 3.87, 11.52), or asked their doctor to order a screening test (OR = 2.24, 95 % CI 1.36, 3.69) had higher odds of being screened within guidelines in multivariable analysis. Findings suggest that access to and utilization of healthcare services, social influence, and patient-provider communication were the major factors associated with CRC screening. Researchers and healthcare providers should develop and implement strategies targeting these barriers/facilitators to improve CRC screening rates and reduce the CRC burden among residents of Appalachia.

Overview of the CDC Cervical Cancer (Cx3) Study: an educational intervention of HPV testing for cervical cancer screening

BACKGROUND

The recommended screening interval when using the Papanicolaou (Pap) and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-testing) is 5 years. However because providers are reluctant to extend the screening interval, we launched a study to identify barriers to appropriate use of the co-test and to implement an educational intervention to promote evidence-based screening practices. This article provides an overview of the study including the multi-component intervention and participant demographics.

METHODS

The study was conducted in 15 clinics associated with 6 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Illinois. Each clinic received HPV tests to administer with routine Pap tests among enrolled patients (n=2,246) and was assigned to a study arm: intervention arm (n=7) received a multi-component educational intervention (small media, academic detailing, and website) for providers and printed educational materials for patients, and control arm (n=8) received printed copies of general guidelines. Clinic coordinators (n=15), providers (n=98), and patients (n=984) completed baseline surveys to assess screening practices.

RESULTS

Providers reported an average age of 41.3 years and were predominately female, non-Hispanic, and white. Patients reported an average age of 45.0 years and nearly two-thirds were Hispanic or black. Of the 2,246 patients, 89% had a normal co-test. Lessons learned from the study included the importance of buy-in at a high level in the organization, a champion provider, and a clinical coordinator devoted to the study.

CONCLUSION

Materials from this study can be adapted to educate providers and patients on appropriate use of the co-test and encourage extended screening intervals as a safe and effective practice.

Effectiveness of a primary care practice intervention for increasing colorectal cancer screening in Appalachian Kentucky

OBJECTIVE

This report describes findings from a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in primary care practices in Appalachian Kentucky.

METHODS

Sixty-six primary care practices were randomized to early or delayed intervention groups. The intervention was provided at practices using academic detailing, a method of education where providers receive information on a specific topic through personal contact. Data were collected in cross-sectional surveys of medical records at baseline and six months post-intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 3844 medical records were reviewed at baseline and 3751 at the six-month follow-up. At baselines, colonoscopy was recommended more frequently (43.4%) than any other screening modality, followed by fecal occult blood testing (18.0%), flexible sigmoidoscopy (0.4%), and double-contrast barium enema (0.3%). Rates of documented screening results were higher for all practices at the six-month follow-up for colonoscopy (31.8% vs 29.6%) and fecal occult blood testing (12.2% vs 11.2%). For early intervention practices that recommended screening, colonoscopy rates increased by 15.7% at six months compared to an increase of 2.4% in the delayed intervention practices (p=.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Using academic detailing to reach rural primary care providers with a CRC screening intervention was associated with an increase in colonoscopy.

Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behaviors among Appalachian residents

OBJECTIVES

We determined the validity of self-reported colorectal cancer (CRC) screening data provided by Appalachian Ohio residents and identified correlates of providing accurate data.

DESIGN AND SAMPLE

We conducted cross-sectional telephone interviews between September 2009 and April 2010. Our study included Appalachian Ohio residents (n = 721) ages 51-75 years.

MEASURES

We compared self-reported CRC screening data to medical records to determine validity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify correlates of providing accurate self-reported screening data.

RESULTS

About 68% of participants self-reported having any CRC screening test within recommended guidelines, whereas medical records indicated that only 49% were within guidelines (concordance = 0.76). Concordance was higher for flexible sigmoidoscopy and fecal occult blood test compared with colonoscopy, although sensitivity and positive predictive value were much higher for colonoscopy. Participants overreported CRC screening behaviors for all tests. Participants who had a regular checkup in the last 2 years (OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.15-6.73), or who self-rated their health as good or better (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.12-3.16) were more likely to provide accurate screening data.

CONCLUSIONS

Many participants failed to provide accurate CRC screening data, and validity varied greatly across individual CRC screening tests. Future CRC screening studies among Appalachian residents should use medical records, if possible, to determine screening histories.

A pilot study for using fecal immunochemical testing to increase colorectal cancer screening in Appalachia, 2008-2009

INTRODUCTION

The Appalachian region of the United States has disproportionately high colorectal cancer (CRC) death rates and low screening rates. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess acceptability of a take-home fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the effect of follow-up telephone counseling for increasing CRC screening in rural Appalachia.

METHODS

We used a prospective, single-group, multiple-site design, with centralized laboratory reports of screening adherence and baseline and 3-month questionnaires. Successive patients, aged 50 or older, at average CRC risk and due for screening were enrolled during a routine visit to 3 primary care practices in rural Appalachian Pennsylvania and received a free take-home FIT and educational brochure. Those who had not returned the test 2 weeks later were referred for telephone counseling.

RESULTS

Of 232 patients approached, 200 (86.2%) agreed to participate. Of these, 145 (72.5%) completed the FIT as recommended (adherent) and 55 (27.5%) were referred for telephone counseling (nonadherent), of whom 23 (41.8%) became adherent after 1 to 2 counseling sessions, an 11.5 percentage-point increase in screening after telephone counseling and 84% FIT adherence overall. Lack of CRC-related knowledge and perceived CRC risk were the screening barriers most highly associated with nonadherence. Although not statistically significant, the rate of conversion to screening adherence was higher among participants who received telephone counseling compared to an answering machine reminder.

CONCLUSION

If confirmed in future randomized trials, provider-recommended take-home FIT and follow-up telephone counseling may be methods to increase CRC screening in Appalachia.

Disparities in underserved white populations: the case of cancer-related disparities in Appalachia

There are meaningful cancer-related disparities in the Appalachian region of the U.S. To address these disparities, the Appalachia Community Cancer Network (ACCN), a collaboration of investigators and community partners in five states (Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia), is involved in increasing cancer education and awareness, conducting community-based participatory research (CBPR), and creating mentorship and training opportunities. The primary objective of this paper is to describe cancer-related disparities in the Appalachian region of the U.S. as an example of the disparities experienced by underserved, predominantly white, rural populations, and to describe ACCN activities designed to intervene regarding these disparities. An ACCN overview/history and the diverse activities of ACCN-participating states are presented in an effort to suggest potential useful strategies for working to reduce health-related disparities in underserved white populations. Strengths that have emerged from the ACCN approach (e.g., innovative collaborations, long-standing established networks) and remaining challenges (e.g., difficulties with continually changing communities, scarce resources) are described. Important recommendations that have emerged from the ACCN are also presented, including the value of allowing communities to lead CBPR efforts. Characteristics of the community-based work of the ACCN provide a framework for reducing health-related disparities in Appalachia and in other underserved white and rural populations.