1
|
Kelly KM, Dhumal T, Scott VG, Falah N, Kronk R, Terry AB, Graves K, Pickarski J, Au M. Genetic Services in Appalachia Conference Series. Am J Med Genet A 2025:e63990. [PMID: 39868823 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.63990] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2024] [Revised: 12/11/2024] [Accepted: 01/03/2025] [Indexed: 01/28/2025]
Abstract
This study examined the data generated as part of a seven-session webinar series that focused on genetics care provision in the medically underserved, rural Appalachian region and examined how these services have adapted to challenging practice environments. Barriers and facilitators to care in our region were considered. Data included a baseline survey of registrants, transcripts of sessions, and feedback about sessions. We analyzed data with a sequential and concurrent mixed methods approach. Registrants (n = 137) were disproportionately healthcare providers with genetic services expertise (37.2%). Approximately half (43.8%) of registrants were from KY, WV, and TN in the central Appalachian region. Our baseline survey found that the most noted barriers were the cost of services, lack of providers, and access to care. The most common facilitator was telehealth. Analysis of transcripts identified barriers that were consistent with those noted in the baseline survey, but additional support and network opportunities were discussed to allow for learning across services. Numerous barriers to service delivery were noted; however, despite challenges, participants identified opportunities and resources in the community. These insights will inform a research agenda aimed at advancing genetics services in rural Appalachia, addressing challenges, and leveraging assets for improved healthcare access and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberly M Kelly
- Center for Innovation in Health Equity Research, Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Trupti Dhumal
- West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
| | | | - Nadia Falah
- Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Margaret Au
- University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Naseem Z, Butt QM, Shaukat A, Grenfell-Dexter R, Zhu J, D'Souza B, Strugnell N. Clinical Outcomes and Resource Efficiency of a Telehealth Model for New Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding Referrals: A Tertiary Colorectal Outpatient Service Audit. Int J Telemed Appl 2025; 2025:9945160. [PMID: 39822331 PMCID: PMC11737902 DOI: 10.1155/ijta/9945160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2024] [Revised: 08/31/2024] [Accepted: 12/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/19/2025] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth (TH) has gained increasing relevance in colorectal patient care, prompting an audit of the TH clinic at a tertiary colorectal unit. This study evaluated telephone-based consultations' clinical efficacy and diagnostic thresholds for new lower gastrointestinal (LGI) bleeding referrals. Methods: We conducted a quality assurance audit of the per rectal (PR) bleeding TH clinic at Northern Hospital Victoria, evaluating new LGI bleeding referrals. Data from July 2021 to June 2023 were extracted from the Referral Management System (RMS) and analyzed. The study focused on newly referred patients, excluding those previously seen or awaiting procedures. Clinical efficacy was determined through sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values, with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve assessing the TH method's discrimination threshold. Results: Of the 239 patients, 131 met the inclusion criteria, with a compliance rate of 96%. The TH clinic demonstrated a sensitivity of 75.76% and specificity of 52.46% in distinguishing between colorectal and anal pathologies. The average time from referral to a diagnostic procedure was 9.75 weeks, with a reduction in median wait time for first appointments from 19 weeks prepandemic to 3.6 weeks. A cost-benefit analysis highlighted TH clinics' ability to reduce overhead costs and maintain a revenue stream despite reduced face-to-face consultations. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the telecare service model serves as an effective complementary approach for managing new LGI bleeding referrals. Further research on long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness is necessary to fully assess telecare as a potentially sustainable hybrid model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zainab Naseem
- Department of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Northern Hospital Epping, Epping, Australia
| | - Qamar M. Butt
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Northern Hospital Epping, Epping, Australia
| | - Amina Shaukat
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Northern Hospital Epping, Epping, Australia
| | | | - Junzhe Zhu
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Basil D'Souza
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Northern Hospital Epping, Epping, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Neil Strugnell
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Northern Hospital Epping, Epping, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abdul Malik TF, Beh HC, Selvaraj CS, Mallen CD, Ng CJ, Lee YK. Interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among people with a family history of colorectal cancer: A scoping review. Prev Med 2024; 189:108137. [PMID: 39277034 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.108137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2024] [Revised: 09/10/2024] [Accepted: 09/10/2024] [Indexed: 09/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The global incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is rising, with people having a family history of CRC (PFH-CRC) facing double the risk compared to the average-risk population. Despite this, CRC screening uptake among PFH-CRC remains low. There is a lack of systematic mapping of interventions promoting CRC screening in this high-risk population. OBJECTIVE We conducted a scoping review to identify the types of interventions targeting PFH-CRC, their effectiveness in increasing CRC screening uptake, and the elements associated with the outcomes. METHODS The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping review was followed. The search for eligible articles was conducted from the inception of each database until 17 July 2024 in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO and Web of Science with no restrictions on language. RESULTS Thirty studies from 1995 to 2023 across 13 countries were included; mostly from high-income countries. There was considerable variability in study design, intervention characteristics, and screening outcomes. Eleven studies used theoretical frameworks in intervention development. Fourteen studies reported statistically significant increases in screening uptake among PFH-CRC, most using complex, multiple-component interventions. Tailored print materials and patient navigation more consistently demonstrated increased screening uptake, while counselling yielded mixed results. CONCLUSION Interventions for promoting CRC screening uptake in PFH-CRC commonly incorporate print material, patient navigation and counselling, often combined into complex interventions. Future research should include more implementation studies to translate these interventions into real-world settings. Additionally, there are gaps in research from low- and middle-income countries, highlighting the need for further research in these resource-limited settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tun Firzara Abdul Malik
- Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | - Hooi Chin Beh
- Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | - Christine Shamala Selvaraj
- Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | | | - Chirk Jenn Ng
- Department of Research, SingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore 150167, Singapore; Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore 169857, Singapore.
| | - Yew Kong Lee
- Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Williams KN, May FP, Cummings LC, Srivastava N, Shahidi N, Kohansal A, Panganamamula K, Garg R, Singh A, Green B, Nguyen JC, Essex EA, Carethers JM, Elmunzer BJ. Quality measures in the delivery of equitable endoscopic care to traditionally underserved patients in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2024:S0016-5107(24)03325-X. [PMID: 39425707 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.06.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2024] [Accepted: 06/21/2024] [Indexed: 10/21/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Kathy N Williams
- Division of Gastroenterology, Cooper University Hospital, Camden, New Jersey, USA
| | - Folasade P May
- Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Linda C Cummings
- Division of Gastroenterology and Liver Disease, University Hospitals Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Neetika Srivastava
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Neal Shahidi
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Ali Kohansal
- Division of Digestive Care and Endoscopy, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Kashyap Panganamamula
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Rajat Garg
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Amandeep Singh
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Bryan Green
- Digestive Disease Group, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, USA
| | - Jennie C Nguyen
- Digestive Diseases Center, MUSC Health, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
| | - Eden A Essex
- American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Downers Grove, Illinois, USA
| | - John M Carethers
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Moores Cancer Center, and Wetheim School of Public Health, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - B Joseph Elmunzer
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kim J, Dai HD, Michaud T, Verma S, King KM, Ewing JW, Mabiala-Maye G, Estabrooks P. Leveraging Multi-Sectoral Partnership for Colorectal Cancer Education and Screening in the African American Community: A Protocol and Preliminary Results. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2024:10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w. [PMID: 39313626 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/10/2024] [Indexed: 09/25/2024]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) awareness and screening rates are still low in African Americans (AAs), especially for those who do not have regular access to health care. We established a multi-sector community partnership between academia, health system, cancer advocacy, and local county treasurer's office (CTO), to test a pilot CRC screening intervention using a tailored educational brochure and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Participants were recruited at a local CTO in an urban midwestern region. Once eligible, participants were assigned to 2-by-2 intervention arms by educational strategy (brochure vs. no brochure) and FIT provision strategy (direct provision by onsite staff vs. indirect provision via phone/online request). We compared the effect of different strategies on FIT return rates. Of 1500 individuals approached, 212 were eligible for the study. The final sample consisted of 209 participants who were predominantly men (57%) and AAs (85%). No differences were found in the return rates by educational brochure (24% [brochure] vs. 23% [no brochure]; p = 0.82). In regard to FIT provision strategy, direct FIT provision yielded higher return rates than indirect provision (31% vs. 15%; p = 0.01). When the four groups were compared, direct provision with education brochure yielded the highest return rates (33.9%), followed by direct provision only (27.5%), indirect provision only (18%), and indirect provision with a brochure (12.2%). For community-based CRC screening intervention using stool-based test, the direct provision of FIT kits with educational brochure outperforms the other three strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jungyoon Kim
- Department of Health Services Research and Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA.
| | - Hongying Daisy Dai
- Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Tzeyu Michaud
- Department of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Sachi Verma
- Nebraska Hospital Association, Lincoln, NE, USA
| | - Keyonna M King
- Department of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | | | - Grace Mabiala-Maye
- Department of Health Services Research and Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA
| | - Paul Estabrooks
- Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Utah College of Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kang J, Wang S, Yi J, Zhang Q. Effects of health education on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Screen 2024; 31:121-133. [PMID: 38409794 DOI: 10.1177/09691413241233993] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/28/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To synthesize the effects of educational intervention on the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. METHODS A total of eight Chinese and English databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Medline and China Biology Medicine disc) from the time of library establishment to June 2023, for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of educational intervention on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. Two researchers independently screened and evaluated the quality of studies. RevMan 5.3 software was used to calculate the pooled effect size. RESULTS Thirteen studies involving 5628 participants were chosen to include in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that health education can increase screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.16-1.65, P = 0.0002). The effect shown after short-term follow-up (≤6 months) was insignificant in terms of improving screening rate (RR = 1.46, 95% CI = 0.94-2.26, P = 0.09), but after long-term follow-up (>6 months) the improvement was greater (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.13-1.65, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION Health education is effective in increasing the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. The effect is more evident after long-term than short-term follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaxun Kang
- School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Shanshan Wang
- School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Jingna Yi
- School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Qiushi Zhang
- School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Cragun D, Dean M, Baker D, Kelley M, Hooker G, Weidner A, Hunt P, Pal T. The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:3361-3378. [PMID: 38920739 PMCID: PMC11202617 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31060256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2024] [Revised: 05/30/2024] [Accepted: 06/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024] Open
Abstract
A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) is a difference in the DNA sequence with uncertain consequences for gene function. A VUS in a hereditary cancer gene should not change medical care, yet some patients undergo medical procedures based on their VUS result, highlighting the unmet educational needs among patients and healthcare providers. To address this need, we developed, evaluated, and refined novel educational materials to explain that while VUS results do not change medical care, it remains important to share any personal or family history of cancer with family members given that their personal and family medical history can guide their cancer risk management. We began by reviewing the prior literature and transcripts from interviews with six individuals with a VUS result to identify content and design considerations to incorporate into educational materials. We then gathered feedback to improve materials via a focus group of multidisciplinary experts and multiple rounds of semi-structured interviews with individuals with a VUS result. Themes for how to improve content, visuals, and usefulness were used to refine the materials. In the final round of interviews with an additional 10 individuals with a VUS result, materials were described as relatable, useful, factual, and easy to navigate, and also increased their understanding of cancer gene VUS results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, USA
| | - Marleah Dean
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, USA
- Outcomes & Behavior Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - David Baker
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37212, USA
| | - Meghan Kelley
- Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, USA
| | - Gillian Hooker
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37212, USA
| | - Anne Weidner
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37212, USA
| | - Paige Hunt
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, USA
| | - Tuya Pal
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37212, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Owens-Jasey C, Chen J, Xu R, Angier H, Huebschmann AG, Ito Fukunaga M, Chaiyachati KH, Rendle KA, Robien K, DiMartino L, Amante DJ, Faro JM, Kepper MM, Ramsey AT, Bressman E, Gold R. Implementation of Health IT for Cancer Screening in US Primary Care: Scoping Review. JMIR Cancer 2024; 10:e49002. [PMID: 38687595 PMCID: PMC11094604 DOI: 10.2196/49002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2023] [Revised: 09/29/2023] [Accepted: 03/04/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A substantial percentage of the US population is not up to date on guideline-recommended cancer screenings. Identifying interventions that effectively improve screening rates would enhance the delivery of such screening. Interventions involving health IT (HIT) show promise, but much remains unknown about how HIT is optimized to support cancer screening in primary care. OBJECTIVE This scoping review aims to identify (1) HIT-based interventions that effectively support guideline concordance in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening provision and follow-up in the primary care setting and (2) barriers or facilitators to the implementation of effective HIT in this setting. METHODS Following scoping review guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore databases for US-based studies from 2015 to 2021 that featured HIT targeting breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening in primary care. Studies were dual screened using a review criteria checklist. Data extraction was guided by the following implementation science frameworks: the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework; the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy; and implementation strategy reporting domains. It was also guided by the Integrated Technology Implementation Model that incorporates theories of both implementation science and technology adoption. Reporting was guided by PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). RESULTS A total of 101 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (85/101, 84.2%) involved electronic health record-based HIT interventions. The most common HIT function was clinical decision support, primarily used for panel management or at the point of care. Most studies related to HIT targeting colorectal cancer screening (83/101, 82.2%), followed by studies related to breast cancer screening (28/101, 27.7%), and cervical cancer screening (19/101, 18.8%). Improvements in cancer screening were associated with HIT-based interventions in most studies (36/54, 67% of colorectal cancer-relevant studies; 9/14, 64% of breast cancer-relevant studies; and 7/10, 70% of cervical cancer-relevant studies). Most studies (79/101, 78.2%) reported on the reach of certain interventions, while 17.8% (18/101) of the included studies reported on the adoption or maintenance. Reported barriers and facilitators to HIT adoption primarily related to inner context factors of primary care settings (eg, staffing and organizational policies that support or hinder HIT adoption). Implementation strategies for HIT adoption were reported in 23.8% (24/101) of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS There are substantial evidence gaps regarding the effectiveness of HIT-based interventions, especially those targeting guideline-concordant breast and colorectal cancer screening in primary care. Even less is known about how to enhance the adoption of technologies that have been proven effective in supporting breast, colorectal, or cervical cancer screening. Research is needed to ensure that the potential benefits of effective HIT-based interventions equitably reach diverse primary care populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Constance Owens-Jasey
- BRIDGE-C2 Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States
- Department of Health Administration and Policy, College of Public Health, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, United States
- OCHIN, Inc, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Jinying Chen
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology, Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States
- Data Science Core, Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States
- iDAPT Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC, United States
| | - Ran Xu
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Heather Angier
- Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Amy G Huebschmann
- Adult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, Ludeman Family Center for Women's Health Research, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, United States
| | - Mayuko Ito Fukunaga
- Department of Medicine, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
| | - Krisda H Chaiyachati
- Penn Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- Verily Life Sciences, South San Francisco, CA, United States
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Katharine A Rendle
- Penn Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Kim Robien
- Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Lisa DiMartino
- RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
- UT Southwestern Medical Center, University of Texas, Dallas, TX, United States
| | - Daniel J Amante
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
| | - Jamie M Faro
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
| | - Maura M Kepper
- Brown School, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Alex T Ramsey
- Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Eric Bressman
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Rachel Gold
- BRIDGE-C2 Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States
- OCHIN, Inc, Portland, OR, United States
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bai Y, Wong CL, Chen J, So WKW. Implementing a tailored communication intervention to increase colonoscopy screening rates among first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer: Lessons learned. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2023; 67:102408. [PMID: 37806150 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2022] [Revised: 07/23/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report the process evaluation of a tailored communication intervention for first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients in a randomized controlled trial. METHOD Based on the MRC process evaluation framework, the process of delivering a two-arm RCT intervention were evaluated on 3 themes: (1) implementation, (2) mechanism, and (3) contextual factors. Implementation data were collected through a logbook, online tool platform feedback, and questionnaire surveys. Subgroup analysis was conducted for implementation outcomes. The mechanism and contextual factors were analyzed by mediation and moderation analysis. RESULTS From March 2019 to May 2019, 188 (57%) eligible participants were recruited to participate in this study in Shenzhen, China. In the intervention group, 68 (72.3%) participants received written and verbal sessions. Relatively high satisfaction rates (77.6%-100%) were achieved. The mediating effect was found for perceived barriers (95%CI = -0.880, -0.133) and cues to action (95%CI = 0.043, 0.679). No moderators were identified. People who received the first two sessions are more likely to receive a colonoscopy, whereas the time spent on intervention did not influence the colonoscopy uptake. CONCLUSIONS Potential strategies to enlarge the tailored effect were identified, including tailoring communication on the perceived barriers and cues to action and reinforcing patients' compliance in the first written and verbal sessions. To accomplish the difficult task of recruiting at-risk family members, direct approaches and adequate records on contact information of at-risk family members are suggested when the cancer cases were identified for the first time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang Bai
- School of Nursing, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Cho Lee Wong
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Jieling Chen
- School of Nursing, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Winnie K W So
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Yakoubovitch S, Zaki T, Anand S, Pecoriello J, Liang PS. Effect of Behavioral Interventions on the Uptake of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2023; 118:1829-1840. [PMID: 37606070 PMCID: PMC10592067 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002478] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 08/23/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Screening decreases colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, but uptake in the United States remains suboptimal. Prior studies have investigated the effect of various interventions on overall colorectal cancer screening and stool-based testing, but the effect on colonoscopy-the predominant screening test in the United States-has not been fully examined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through January 2022 for controlled trials that assessed the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. All titles, abstracts, and articles were screened by at least 2 independent reviewers. Odds ratios were extracted from the original article or calculated from the raw data. The primary outcome was the relative increase in screening colonoscopy completion with any behavioral intervention. We performed random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analysis by type of intervention. RESULTS A total of 25 studies with 30 behavioral interventions were analyzed. The most common interventions were patient navigation (n = 11) and multicomponent interventions (n = 6). Overall, behavioral interventions increased colonoscopy completion by 54% compared with controls (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-1.88). Patient navigation (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.34) and multicomponent interventions (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.17-2.89) had the strongest effect on colonoscopy completion among interventions examined in multiple studies. Significant heterogeneity was observed both overall and by intervention type. There was no evidence of publication bias. DISCUSSION Behavioral interventions increase screening colonoscopy completion and should be adopted in clinical practice. In particular, patient navigation and multicomponent interventions are the best-studied and most effective interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Timothy Zaki
- Department of Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Sanya Anand
- Department of Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, New York, USA
| | - Jillian Pecoriello
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Peter S Liang
- Department of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, VA New York Harbor Health Care System, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Metcalfe KA, Pal T, Narod SA, Armel S, Shickh S, Buckley K, Walters ST, Brennenstuhl S, Kinney AY. Theory-based behavior change intervention to increase uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant: The PREVENT randomized controlled trial. Cancer Med 2023; 12:18246-18257. [PMID: 37602539 PMCID: PMC10524042 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2022] [Revised: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 08/22/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of a theory-based behavioral intervention delivered by genetic counselors on the uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) at 12 and 24 months by women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant (PV) compared to women who received usual care. METHODS In this two-arm, multi-site randomized controlled trial participants were randomized to receive a theoretically-guided behavioral telephone intervention or usual care. Outcome data were collected at 12 and 24 months. Participants in the usual care arm were offered the intervention after 12 months. RESULTS Data on 107 participants were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the proportion of women who had a RRSO by 1 year (28.6%- intervention; 22.9%- usual care (p = 0.54)). At 1 year, women who received the intervention had significantly lower mean decisional conflict (pinteraction <0.001) and a higher mean knowledge score at one-year compared to usual care (pinteraction <0.001). At 2 years, 53.9% of participants in the intervention arm had RRSO compared to 32.6% in usual care (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS A theory-based behavioral intervention delivered by genetic counselors to women with a BRCA PV who chose not to have the recommended RRSO was effective at reducing decisional conflict and increasing knowledge in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly A. Metcalfe
- Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of NursingUniversity of TorontoTorontoOntarioCanada
- Women's College Research InstituteTorontoOntarioCanada
| | - Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt‐Ingram Cancer Center at the Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleTennesseeUSA
| | | | - Susan Armel
- Princess Margaret Cancer CentreTorontoOntarioCanada
| | - Salma Shickh
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and EvaluationUniversity of TorontoTorontoOntarioCanada
| | | | - Scott T. Walters
- University of North Texas Health Science CenterFort WorthTexasUSA
| | - Sarah Brennenstuhl
- Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of NursingUniversity of TorontoTorontoOntarioCanada
| | - Anita Y. Kinney
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New JerseyNew BrunswickNew JerseyUSA
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public HealthRutgers UniversityPiscatawayNew JerseyUSA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Gandhi AP, Lee CJ. Telemedicine in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cell Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4108. [PMID: 37627136 PMCID: PMC10452361 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15164108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2023] [Revised: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Telemedicine has played an important role in delivering healthcare for primary care, chronic disease patients, and those with solid organ malignancies. However, its application in subspecialties such as hematologic malignancies, hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), or chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) therapy is not widespread since physical examination is a vital component in delivering care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we widely used telemedicine, since protecting our immunocompromised patients became our top priority. The employment of HCT and CAR-T therapies continues to grow for high-risk hematologic malignancies, particularly in older and frail patients who must visit specialty centers for treatment access. Generally, HCT and CAR-T therapy care is highly complex, necessitating commitment from patients, caregivers, and a multidisciplinary team at specialty academic centers. All healthcare systems adapted to the crisis and implemented rapid changes during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). Telemedicine, a vital modality for delivering healthcare in underserved areas, experienced rapid expansion, regardless of the geographic region, during the COVID-19 PHE. The data emerging from practices implemented during the PHE are propelling the field of telemedicine forward, particularly for specialties with complex medical treatments such as HCT and CAR-T therapy. In this review, we examine the current data on telemedicine in HCT and cellular therapy care models for the acute and long-term care of our patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arpita P. Gandhi
- Center for Hematologic Malignancies, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Catherine J. Lee
- Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center, Clinical Research Division, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kinney AY, Walters ST, Lin Y, Lu SE, Kim A, Ani J, Heidt E, Le Compte CJ, O'Malley D, Stroup A, Paddock LE, Grumet S, Boyce TW, Toppmeyer DL, McDougall JA. Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:2767-2778. [PMID: 36787512 PMCID: PMC10414736 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00751] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/04/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN). METHODS In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call. RESULTS Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3; P < .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5; P < .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing. CONCLUSION TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Y. Kinney
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | | | - Yong Lin
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Shou-En Lu
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Arreum Kim
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Julianne Ani
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Emily Heidt
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | | | - Denalee O'Malley
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
- School of Medicine, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Antoinette Stroup
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Lisa E. Paddock
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Sherry Grumet
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Tawny W. Boyce
- UNM Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Blount E, Davey MG, Joyce WP. Patient reported satisfaction levels with the use of telemedicine for general surgery-A systematic review of randomized control trials. SURGERY IN PRACTICE AND SCIENCE 2023; 12:100152. [PMID: 36570642 PMCID: PMC9769022 DOI: 10.1016/j.sipas.2022.100152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 12/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background As healthcare continues to evolve in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic, surgeons are presented with the opportunity to integrate telemedicine into healthcare in tandem with in-person consultations. We aimed to perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess patient satisfaction with telemedicine interventions in general surgery. Methods A systematic review was performed in accordance to the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were included. The risk of bias 2.0 assessment was used to determine potential bias. Results In total, 11 prospective, randomized trials involving 1,598 patients (mean age: 49.1 years) were included. Overall 45.5% (5/11) of the trials compared videoconferencing or telephone follow up to traditional in person follow up. Three studies used smart technologies which include activity tracking devices in combination with a website and mobile application (27.3%). The other 3 interventions involved accelerated discharge on post operative day (POD) 1 with tele videoconferencing on POD 2, Post-operative daily text messages with education videos and video calling capability, and supportive text messages post-operatively. Telemedicine was shown to provide similar levels of patient satisfaction compared to controls in all 11 included RCTs. Conclusion Patient reported satisfaction with the use of telemedicine is similar to standard of care models in general surgery. With several shortcomings confounding the results in support of telemedicine, further experimentation with telemedicine interventions will likely improve patient reported satisfaction with using telemedicine for peroperative surgical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eoghan Blount
- Department of Surgery, Galway Clinic, Co. Galway H91 HHT0, Ireland
| | - Matthew G. Davey
- Department of Surgery, Galway Clinic, Co. Galway H91 HHT0, Ireland
- Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, 123 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2, D02 YN77, Ireland
| | - William P. Joyce
- Department of Surgery, Galway Clinic, Co. Galway H91 HHT0, Ireland
- Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, 123 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2, D02 YN77, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Syvyk S, Roberts SE, Finn CB, Wirtalla C, Kelz R. Colorectal cancer disparities across the continuum of cancer care: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 2022; 224:323-331. [PMID: 35210062 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.02.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2021] [Revised: 01/27/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Disparate colorectal cancer outcomes persist in vulnerable populations. We aimed to examine the distribution of research across the colorectal cancer care continuum, and to determine disparities in the utilization of Surgery among Black patients. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis of colorectal cancer disparities studies was performed. The meta-analysis assessed three utilization measures in Surgery. RESULTS Of 1,199 publications, 60% focused on Prevention, Screening, or Diagnosis, 20% on Survivorship, 15% on Treatment, and 1% on End-of-Life Care. A total of 16 studies, including 1,110,674 patients, were applied to three meta-analyses regarding utilization of Surgery. Black patients were less likely to receive surgery, twice as likely to refuse surgery, and less likely to receive laparoscopic surgery, when compared to White patients. CONCLUSIONS Since 2011, the majority of research focused on prevention, screening, or diagnosis. Given the observed treatment disparities among Black patients, future efforts to reduce colorectal cancer disparities should include interventions within Surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Solomiya Syvyk
- Center for Surgery and Health Economics, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA
| | - Sanford E Roberts
- Center for Surgery and Health Economics, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA; Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Caitlin B Finn
- Center for Surgery and Health Economics, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA; NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medicine, Department of Surgery, New York, NY, USA
| | - Chris Wirtalla
- Center for Surgery and Health Economics, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA; Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Rachel Kelz
- Center for Surgery and Health Economics, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA; Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Hanna K, Arredondo BL, Chavez MN, Geiss C, Hume E, Szalacha L, Christy SM, Vadaparampil S, Menon U, Islam J, Hong YR, Alishahi Tabriz A, Kue J, Turner K. Cancer Screening Among Rural and Urban Clinics During COVID-19: A Multistate Qualitative Study. JCO Oncol Pract 2022; 18:e1045-e1055. [PMID: 35254884 PMCID: PMC9797235 DOI: 10.1200/op.21.00658] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The effects of COVID-19 have been understudied in rural areas. This study sought to (1) identify cancer screening barriers and facilitators during the pandemic in rural and urban primary care practices, (2) describe implementation strategies to support cancer screening, and (3) provide recommendations. METHODS A qualitative study was conducted (N = 42) with primary care staff across 20 sites. Individual interviews were conducted through videoconference from August 2020 to April 2021 and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive coding (hybrid approach) in NVivo 12 Plus. Practices included federally qualified health centers, tribal health centers, rural health clinics, hospital/health system-owned clinics, and academic medical centers across 10 states including urban (55%) and rural (45%) sites. Staff included individuals serving in the dual role of health care provider and administrator (21.4%), health care administrator (23.8%), physician (19.0%), advanced practice provider (11.9%), or resident (23.8%). The interviews assessed perceptions about cancer screening barriers and facilitators, implementation strategies, and future recommendations. RESULTS Participants reported multilevel barriers to cancer screening including policy-level (eg, elective procedure delays), organizational (eg, backlogs), and individual (eg, patient cancellation). Several facilitators to screening were noted, such as home-based testing, using telehealth, and strong partnerships with referral sites. Practices used strategies to encourage screening, such as incentivizing patients and providers and expanding outreach. Rural clinics reported challenges with backlogs, staffing, telehealth implementation, and patient outreach. CONCLUSION Primary care staff used innovative strategies during the pandemic to promote cancer screening. Unresolved challenges (eg, backlogs and inability to implement telehealth) disproportionately affected rural clinics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karim Hanna
- Department of Family Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Brandy L. Arredondo
- Participant Research, Interventions, and Measurement Core, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Melody N. Chavez
- Participant Research, Interventions, and Measurement Core, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Carley Geiss
- Participant Research, Interventions, and Measurement Core, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Emma Hume
- Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Laura Szalacha
- Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL,College of Nursing, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Shannon M. Christy
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL,Center for Immunization and Infection Research in Cancer, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Susan Vadaparampil
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Usha Menon
- College of Nursing, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Jessica Islam
- Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL,Center for Immunization and Infection Research in Cancer, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Young-Rock Hong
- Department of Health Services Research and Management, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Amir Alishahi Tabriz
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Jennifer Kue
- College of Nursing, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Kea Turner
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL,Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL,Kea Turner, PhD, MPH, MA, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center; Department of Oncological Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, MFC-EDU, Tampa, FL 33612; Twitter: @TurnerKea; e-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Long NN, Lau MPXL, Lee ARYB, Yam NE, Koh NYK, Ho CSH. Motivational Interviewing to Improve the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022; 9:889124. [PMID: 35559348 PMCID: PMC9090440 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.889124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Colorectal cancer screening when done early can significantly reduce mortality. However, screening compliance is still lower than expected even in countries with established screening programs. Motivational interviewing is an approach that has been explored to promote behavioral change including screening compliance. This review synthesizes the efficacy of motivational interviewing in promoting uptake of colorectal screening modalities and is the only review so far that examines motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening alone. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effects of motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening. PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched to identify eligible studies from inception to June 2021 and selection criteria was defined. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The DerSimonian and Laird random effects model was used in the statistical analysis for studies included in the meta-analysis. Results Fourteen studies from 14 randomized-controlled trials with a low to moderate risk of bias were analyzed. 8 studies in the systematic review showed that motivational interviewing is superior to a control group. Meta-analysis was conducted on 11 studies and showed that motivational interviewing is statistically significant in increasing colorectal cancer screening rates in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis. Timing of data collection of colorectal cancer screening rates did not make a significant difference to the efficacy of motivational interviewing. Studies that offered and accepted a mixture of colorectal screening modalities such as colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical tests were significantly more likely to have favorable colorectal screening outcomes. Heterogeneity in intervention was noted between studies, specifically differences in the training of interventionists, intervention delivery and comparator components. Conclusion Motivational interviewing is a tailored intervention demonstrating mixed evidence in improving colorectal cancer screening attendance amongst individuals. More research is needed to rigorously compare the effect of motivational interviewing alone vs. in combination with other screening promotion strategies to enhance colorectal cancer screening compliance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Novia Niannian Long
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | | | | | - Natalie Elizabeth Yam
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Nicholas Ye Kai Koh
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Cyrus Su Hui Ho
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Spector A, Ash E, Garland B, McLaughlin R, Ritenour A, Gonynor C, Riconda D. Perceptions of motivational interviewing in genetic counseling practice and training. J Genet Couns 2022; 31:1173-1182. [PMID: 35502606 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1588] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2021] [Revised: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Motivational interviewing (MI) is a counseling approach that allows a provider to engage in a dialog with patients to evoke motivation for health behavior change or decision-making. MI is a relatively recent addition to the curricula of genetic counseling programs, and recent research has demonstrated its utility in genetic counseling practice. However, the perspectives of genetic counselors trained in MI have yet to be studied with the intent of illuminating how it is applied in practice or what should be emphasized in training. This qualitative study interviewed fifteen genetic counselors from various practice areas who have had training in MI. The interviews focused on how MI is being used in practice, and the strengths and weaknesses of their MI training. Five themes were identified through inductive qualitative analysis: (a) utility of MI in genetic counseling practice, (b) value of MI in genetic counseling training, (c) barriers to implementing MI in genetic counseling practice, (d) barriers to training genetic counselors in MI, and (e) timing of MI training. The perspectives discovered from this study can help inform genetic counseling educators who wish to include MI in their curriculum. In addition for those programs that already include MI, these results serve as a guide for the development of training role-plays and/or standardized patient encounter scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashley Spector
- School of Health Professions, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.,Sarah Lawrence College, Joan H. Marks Graduate Program in Human Genetics, Bronxville, New York, USA
| | - Erin Ash
- Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Beth Garland
- Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA
| | - Robert McLaughlin
- School of Health Professions, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Adasia Ritenour
- School of Health Professions, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.,Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Caroline Gonynor
- Department of Pediatrics, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Daniel Riconda
- School of Health Professions, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.,Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Bai Y, Wong CL, Peng X, Choi KC, SO WK. Effectiveness of a tailored communication intervention on colonoscopy uptake for firstdegree relatives of colorectal cancer patients: A randomised controlled trial. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 2022; 9:100068. [PMID: 35651882 PMCID: PMC9149019 DOI: 10.1016/j.apjon.2022.04.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2021] [Accepted: 04/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the effect of a WeChat tailored communication intervention on colonoscopy uptake and health beliefs in Chinese first-degree relatives (FDRs) of colorectal cancer patients. Methods This study employed a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. A total of 188 eligible FDRs were recruited and randomly assigned to the tailored intervention group or control group. Health beliefs were assessed at 1 (T1) and 3 months (T2) postintervention. The colonoscopy uptake was verified by medical records at T2. Data were analyzed using binary logistic regression and generalized estimating equation models. Results Compared with the participants in the control group, those in the intervention group had a significant improvement in terms of colonoscopy uptake (OR = 2.752, 95% CI: 1.428–5.303, P < 0.01), perceived susceptibility (T1: β = 0.298, 95% CI: 0.052–0.402, P < 0.05; T2: β = 0.251, 95% CI: 0.078–0.424, P < 0.001) and cues to action (T1: β = 0.0.264, 95% CI: 0.138–0.389, P < 0.001; T2: β = 0.327, 95% CI: 0.195–0.459, P < 0.001) and a significant reduction in perceived barriers (T1: β = −0.237, 95% CI: −0.360−0.115, P < 0.01; T2: β = −0.196, 95% CI: −0.331−0.062, P < 0.01). Conclusions This study broadens the application of tailored communication using novel channels in the context of screening in the at-risk Chinese population. The results provide insights on how to improve the intervention by modifying its components and communication channels.
Collapse
|
20
|
Choe L, Lau J, Fong SY, Chew E, Chow WM, Pang Y, Lim TZ, Chong CS, Chew MH, Foo FJ, Koh FHX, Wong ML, Koh GCH, Tan KK. Colorectal cancer patients advocating screening to their siblings: a randomized behavioral intervention. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95:519-526.e2. [PMID: 34896444 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.11.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2021] [Accepted: 11/20/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Siblings of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are at increased risk of developing CRC, but screening rates remain low. Through a randomized behavioral intervention, this study aimed to determine whether patients can advocate screening to their siblings using a tailored educational package. METHODS CRC survivors were recruited and randomized into relaying either tailored materials (intervention group) or existing national screening guidelines (control group) to their siblings. Siblings could respond to the study team if they were interested in learning about CRC screening. Study outcomes were patient advocacy rates (number of patients who had successfully contacted at least 1 eligible sibling) between groups and the proportion of eligible siblings who responded. RESULTS Between May 2017 and March 2021, 219 CRC patients were randomized to the intervention (n = 110) and control (n = 109) groups. Patient advocacy rates were high and did not differ significantly between groups. However, only 14.3% of eligible siblings (n = 85) responded to the study team. Siblings of patients from the intervention group were more likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0; P < .05). Moreover, after controlling for potential confounders, siblings aged ≥60 years were significantly less likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, .3; 95% confidence interval, .1-.7; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS CRC patients are willing advocates of screening, and siblings contacted by patients from the intervention group were also more likely to reach out to the study team. However, overall sibling response rates were low despite advocacy, suggesting that patient-led advocacy should at best be used as an adjunct to other, multipronged CRC screening promotion modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lina Choe
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jerrald Lau
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Si-Ying Fong
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Emily Chew
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Wen-Min Chow
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Yan Pang
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Tian-Zhi Lim
- Division of Surgical Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore
| | - Choon-Seng Chong
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Division of Surgical Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore; University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore
| | - Min-Hoe Chew
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Fung-Joon Foo
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Frederick Hong-Xiang Koh
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Mee-Lian Wong
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | | | - Ker-Kan Tan
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Division of Surgical Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore; University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Ciucă A, Moldovan R, Băban A. Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:8. [PMID: 34980016 PMCID: PMC8722202 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-09086-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Approximately 5% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are part of a well-defined inherited genetic syndrome and up to approximately 30% of these cases have a clinically defined familial basis. Psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer address aspects mainly focused on affective, cognitive and behavioural outcomes. The present review aims to systematically map out the available psychosocial interventions for individuals with a family history of CRC and describe the current state of the research. Methods An extensive electronic search was conducted to investigate the literature published until June 2020. Inclusion criteria consisted of quantitative studies published in English that explored the impact of psychosocial interventions for familial CRC, clearly defined the psychosocial intervention offered and included participants with a family history of CRC. Results The analysis included 52 articles. Genetic counselling, educational interventions, psychological interventions and multimodal interventions were identified across the studies. In terms of diagnoses, Lynch Syndrome, Familial Adenomatous Polyposis, Familial Colorectal Cancer were the main conditions included in the studies. Affective, cognitive, behavioural aspects and quality of life emerged as the most frequently explored outcomes. The studies included individuals with both personal and familial history of CRC or family history alone. Conclusions Our rapid review provides an overview of the literature exploring the impact of psychosocial interventions for familial CRC. The psychosocial interventions identified had an overwhelmingly positive impact across all types of outcomes measured. Genetic counselling appeared to be most beneficial, and this is expected as it is purposively designed to address genetic conditions. Further quantitative analysis of primary empirical research is needed to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of psychosocial interventions as well as the mechanisms through which they exert their effect.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrada Ciucă
- Department of Psychology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Ramona Moldovan
- Department of Psychology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. .,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. .,Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
| | - Adriana Băban
- Department of Psychology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gray DM, Emerson B, Reddy M, Zimmermann BJ, Hashi A, Shoben A, Reiter PL, Katz ML. A Teachable Moment: Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Companions Waiting for Outpatients Undergoing a Colonoscopy. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2021; 36:1163-1169. [PMID: 32318977 PMCID: PMC7575613 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-020-01745-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
To determine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and preferences for a future CRC screening educational intervention among adults (companions) waiting for outpatients undergoing a colonoscopy. We approached 384 companions at three endoscopy centers associated with one healthcare system to complete a survey from March to July 2017. The survey assessed CRC and CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and preferences for a future CRC screening educational intervention. There were 164 companions at average risk for CRC that completed a self-administered survey. Among average-risk companions, 23% were not within screening guidelines. Additionally, 74% of those not within guidelines reported that they had never completed a CRC screening test. The most frequently reported barriers to CRC screening were the perception of not needing screening because they were asymptomatic and lack of a provider recommendation for screening. Companions suggested that a future CRC screening intervention include a brochure and/or a brief video, featuring men and women from different races/ethnicities, a CRC survivor, and a healthcare professional. Almost one-fourth of average-risk companions waiting at endoscopy centers were not within CRC screening guidelines, providing a teachable moment to recruit companions to participate in an educational intervention to encourage screening. Companions provided suggestions (e.g., content and channel) for a future intervention to promote CRC screening in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Darrell M Gray
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
| | - Brent Emerson
- Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
| | - Menaka Reddy
- Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
| | - Barret J Zimmermann
- Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
| | - Abbas Hashi
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Abigail Shoben
- Division of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Paul L Reiter
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
- Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA
| | - Mira L Katz
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA.
- Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Pal T, Hull PC, Koyama T, Lammers P, Martinez D, McArthy J, Schremp E, Tezak A, Washburn A, Whisenant JG, Friedman DL. Enhancing Cancer care of rural dwellers through telehealth and engagement (ENCORE): protocol to evaluate effectiveness of a multi-level telehealth-based intervention to improve rural cancer care delivery. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:1262. [PMID: 34814868 PMCID: PMC8609269 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08949-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite lower cancer incidence rates, cancer mortality is higher among rural compared to urban dwellers. Patient, provider, and institutional level factors contribute to these disparities. The overarching objective of this study is to leverage the multidisciplinary, multispecialty oncology team from an academic cancer center in order to provide comprehensive cancer care at both the patient and provider levels in rural healthcare centers. Our specific aims are to: 1) evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a multi-level telehealth-based intervention consisting of provider access to molecular tumor board expertise along with patient access to a supportive care intervention to improve cancer care delivery; and 2) identify the facilitators and barriers to future larger scale dissemination and implementation of the multi-level intervention. METHODS Coordinated by a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center, this study will include providers and patients across several clinics in two large healthcare systems serving rural communities. Using a telehealth-based molecular tumor board, sequencing results are reviewed, predictive and prognostic markers are discussed, and treatment plans are formulated between expert oncologists and rural providers. Simultaneously, the rural patients will be randomized to receive an evidence-based 6-week self-management supportive care program, Cancer Thriving and Surviving, versus an education attention control. Primary outcomes will be provider uptake of the molecular tumor board recommendation and patient treatment adherence. A mixed methods approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research that combines qualitative key informant interviews and quantitative surveys will be collected from both the patient and provider in order to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing the multi-level intervention. DISCUSSION The proposed study will leverage information technology-enabled, team-based care delivery models in order to deliver comprehensive, coordinated, and high-quality cancer care to rural and/or underserved populations. Simultaneous attention to institutional, provider, and patient level barriers to quality care will afford the opportunity for us to broadly share oncology expertise and develop dissemination and implementation strategies that will enhance the cancer care delivered to patients residing within underserved rural communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT04758338 . Registered 17 February 2021 - Retrospectively registered, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
- Division of Genetic Medicine, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, 536 Robinson Research Building, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Pamela C Hull
- University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center, 800 Rose Street, Lexington, KY, 40536, USA
- Department of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Rural and Underserved Health Research Center, Healthy Kentucky Research Building, 760 Press Avenue, Lexington, KY, 40536, USA
| | - Tatsuki Koyama
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2525 West End, Suite 1100, Nashville, TN, 37203, USA
| | - Phillip Lammers
- Baptist Cancer Center, 80 Humphreys Center Suite 330, Memphis, TN, 38120, USA
| | - Denise Martinez
- Division of Pediatric Hematology & Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 395 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Jacob McArthy
- Division of Pediatric Hematology & Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 395 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Emma Schremp
- Division of Pediatric Hematology & Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 395 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Ann Tezak
- Division of Genetic Medicine, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, 536 Robinson Research Building, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Anne Washburn
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Jennifer G Whisenant
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Avenue South, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA
| | - Debra L Friedman
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA.
- Division of Pediatric Hematology & Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 395 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Bai Y, Cho Lee W, Li G, So WKW. Development and feasibility of an evidence-based and theory-driven tailored mHealth communication intervention to increase colonoscopy screening rate in first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2021; 56:102063. [PMID: 34847402 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2021] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop and investigate the feasibility of an evidence-based and theory-driven tailored communication to increase colonoscopy screening rates amongst first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients. METHOD Based on the tailoring process and identified evidence from the systematic review conducted by the research team, the tailored communication was developed from four aspects: (1) tailoring variables (e.g., demographic, behavioural, and psychosocial characteristics), (2) decision rules, (3) tailored messages and (4) delivery plan. Expert (n = 5) and layman review (n = 5) were conducted to ensure the content validity of decision rules and tailored messages. A single-blinded, family-based cluster randomised controlled trial (n = 21) tested the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS A three-session mobile-based tailored intervention with clear decision rules and 27 tailored messages were developed. In the feasibility study, the recruitment rate was 34.4%. The response rate at 1-month post-intervention was 61.9%. After a voice call was added for nonresponders, the response rate at the 3-month post-intervention increased to 81%. All participants were satisfied with the intervention and agreed that the intervention helped them understand the risks and appropriate screening recommendations. CONCLUSION The development of a three-session mobile-based tailored intervention with an integrated tailoring decision and message system was reported in this study. Given its remote nature, the mobile-based tailored intervention may encounter challenges in family recruitment and online assessment. Suggestions on (1) study design to avoid contamination, (2) recruitment approaches and (3) strategies to promote response to online questionnaires were made for a future definitive trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang Bai
- School of Nursing, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China; The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
| | - Wong Cho Lee
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Gairui Li
- Shenzhen Nanshan Center for Chronic Disease Control, Shenzhen, China
| | - Winnie K W So
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Cragun D, Beckstead J, Farmer M, Hooker G, Dean M, Matloff E, Reid S, Tezak A, Weidner A, Whisenant JG, Pal T. IMProving care After inherited Cancer Testing (IMPACT) study: protocol of a randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of two interventions designed to improve cancer risk management and family communication of genetic test results. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:1099. [PMID: 34645413 PMCID: PMC8513202 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08822-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Accepted: 10/01/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementing genetic testing for inherited cancer predisposition into routine clinical care offers a tremendous opportunity for cancer prevention and early detection. However, genetic testing itself does not improve outcomes; rather, outcomes depend on implemented follow-up care. The IMPACT study is a hybrid type I randomized effectiveness-implementation trial to simultaneously evaluate the effectiveness of two interventions for individuals with inherited cancer predisposition focused on: 1) increasing family communication (FC) of genetic test results; and 2) improving engagement with guideline-based cancer risk management (CRM). METHODS This prospective study will recruit a racially, geographically, and socioeconomically diverse population of individuals with a documented pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in an inherited cancer gene. Eligible participants will be asked to complete an initial trial survey and randomly assigned to one of three arms: A) GeneSHARE, a website designed to increase FC of genetic test results; B) My Gene Counsel's Living Lab Report, a digital tool designed to improve understanding of genetic test results and next steps, including CRM guidelines; or C) a control arm in which participants continue receiving standard care. Follow-up surveys will be conducted at 1, 3, and 12 months following randomization. These surveys include single-item measures, scales, and indices related to: 1) FC and CRM behaviors and behavioral factors following the COM-B theoretical framework (i.e., capability, opportunity, and motivation); 2) implementation outcomes (i.e., acceptability, appropriateness, exposure, and reach); and 3) other contextual factors (i.e., sociodemographic and clinical factors, and uncertainty, distress, and positive aspects of genetic test results). The primary outcomes are an increase in FC of genetic test results (Arm A) and improved engagement with guideline-based CRM without overtreatment or undertreatment (Arm B) by the 12-month follow-up survey. DISCUSSION Our interventions are designed to shift the paradigm by which individuals with P/LP variants in inherited cancer genes are provided with information to enhance FC of genetic test results and engagement with guideline-based CRM. The information gathered through evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of these real-world approaches is needed to modify and scale up adaptive, stepped interventions that have the potential to maximize FC and CRM. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04763915, date registered: February 21, 2021). PROTOCOL VERSION September 17th, 2021 Amendment Number 04.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, 13201 Bruce B Downs Boulevard, IDRB 304, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - Jason Beckstead
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, 13201 Bruce B Downs Boulevard, IDRB 304, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - Meagan Farmer
- My Gene Counsel, PO Box 612, Branford, CT, 06405, USA
| | - Gillian Hooker
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA
| | - Marleah Dean
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, CIS 3043, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA
- Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - Ellen Matloff
- My Gene Counsel, PO Box 612, Branford, CT, 06405, USA
| | - Sonya Reid
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA
| | - Ann Tezak
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA
| | - Anne Weidner
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA
| | - Jennifer G Whisenant
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA
| | - Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1500 21st Avenue South, Suite 2810, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Baldry E, Redlinger-Grosse K, MacFarlane I, Walters ST, Ash E, Steinberger J, Murdy K, Cragun D, Allen-Tice C, Zierhut H. Outcomes from a pilot genetic counseling intervention using motivational interviewing and the extended parallel process model to increase cascade cholesterol screening. J Genet Couns 2021; 31:164-175. [PMID: 34260792 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2020] [Revised: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an inherited condition resulting in increased risk of premature cardiovascular disease. This risk can be reduced with early diagnosis and treatment, but it can be challenging to identify individuals with FH. Cascade screening, the most efficient and cost-effective identification method, requires FH patients to communicate with their at-risk family and encourage them to pursue screening. Beyond FH, patients with conditions increasing disease risk to family members report barriers to the communication process such as insufficient knowledge of the condition and discomfort informing relatives. We conducted a pilot study of a genetic counseling intervention incorporating behavior-change principles from motivational interviewing (MI) and the extended parallel process model (EPPM) to help parents of children with FH overcome these barriers and improve cascade screening rates for FH. Of the 13 participants who completed the intervention and post-intervention surveys, 6 reported contacting and/or screening additional relatives. A large effect size in increasing communication and screening was observed (η2 = 0.20), with the mean percent of at-risk relatives contacted rising from 33% to 45%, and the mean percent screened rising from 32% to 42%. On average, 2.23 new relatives were contacted and 2.46 were screened, per participant, by the end of the study. Direct content analysis revealed that despite the open-ended nature of the goal-setting process, participant goals fell into two categories including those who set goals focused on communicating with and screening family members (n = 9) and those who set goals only focused on managing FH (n = 4). Overall, the communication and screening rates reported after the intervention were higher than previous observations in adult FH populations. These results suggest this EPPM/MI genetic counseling intervention could be a useful tool for increasing communication and cascade screening for FH. With further research on goal-setting techniques, the intervention could be refined and replicated to identify more individuals affected by FH or modified for use with other actionable genetic conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Baldry
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Krista Redlinger-Grosse
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Ian MacFarlane
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Scott T Walters
- Health Sciences Center, University of North Texas, Fort Worth, TX, USA
| | - Erin Ash
- Sarah Lawrence College, Broxville, NY, USA
| | - Julia Steinberger
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Kari Murdy
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Carly Allen-Tice
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Heather Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
SteelFisher GK, McMurtry CL, Caporello HL, McGowan E, Schafer TJ, Lubell KM, Friedman AL, Allen J, Shockey C, Grady A, Ben-Porath EN. Experiences and Views of Domestic Summer Travelers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings from a National Survey. Health Secur 2021; 19:338-348. [PMID: 34030469 PMCID: PMC8217589 DOI: 10.1089/hs.2020.0212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2020] [Revised: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 03/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Domestic travel creates a serious risk of spreading COVID-19, including novel strains of the virus. Motivating potential travelers to take precautions is critical, especially for those at higher risk for severe illness. To provide an evidence base for communication efforts, we examined the experiences and views of travelers during the summer of 2020 through a telephone survey of 1,968 US adults, conducted in English and Spanish, July 2 through July 16, 2020. The survey found that more than one-quarter (28%) of adults had traveled domestically in the prior 30 days, most commonly for "vacation" (43%), and less than half wore masks (46%) or practiced social distancing (47%) "all of the time." Although high-risk adults were significantly less likely to travel than non-high-risk adults (23% vs 31%; P < .001), they were no more likely to take precautions. Many travelers did not wear a mask or practice social distancing because they felt such actions were unnecessary (eg, they were outside or with friends and family). Although a substantial share of travelers (43% to 53%) trusted public health agencies "a great deal" for information about reducing risks while traveling, more travelers (73%) trusted their own healthcare providers. Findings suggest that outreach may be improved by partnering with providers to emphasize the benefits of layering precautions and provide targeted education to high-risk individuals. Messages that are empathetic to the need to reduce stress and convey how precautions can protect loved ones may be particularly resonant after more than a year of pandemic-related restrictions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gillian K. SteelFisher
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Caitlin L. McMurtry
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Hannah L. Caporello
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Ericka McGowan
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Thomas J. Schafer
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Keri M. Lubell
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Allison L. Friedman
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Jessica Allen
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Caitlin Shockey
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Alison Grady
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| | - Eran N. Ben-Porath
- Gillian K. SteelFisher, PhD, MSc, is a Senior Research Scientist and Deputy Director; Caitlin L. McMurtry, SM, is a Research Fellow; and Hannah L. Caporello is Program Manager; all at the Harvard Opinion Research Program, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH), Boston, MA. Caitlin L. McMurtry is also a PhD Candidate, PhD Program in Health Policy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ericka McGowan, MS, is Senior Director, Immunization and Infectious Disease Team, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA. Thomas J. Schafer is Project Director, National Public Health Information Coalition, Canton, GA. Keri M. Lubell, PhD, is a Behavioral Scientist, Division of Emergency Operations, Center for Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. Allison L. Friedman, MS, is a Health Communications Specialist; Jessica Allen, MPH, MSW, is a Health Communications Specialist, Travelers' Health Branch; and Caitlin Shockey, JD, is Associate Director for Communication; all in the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA. Alison Grady, MPH, is a Health Communications Strategist, Kapili Services, LLC, Atlanta, GA. Eran N. Ben-Porath, PhD, is Executive Vice President, SSRS, Glen Mills, PA. All authors acted in a personal capacity. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC, any other portion of the Government of the United States, ASTHO, National Public Health Information Coalition, HSPH, Harvard University, or SSRS. The study was conducted through a cooperative agreement between CDC and ASTHO, who subsequently subcontracted to HSPH
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
ElKefi S, Asan O. How technology impacts communication between cancer patients and their health care providers: A systematic literature review. Int J Med Inform 2021; 149:104430. [PMID: 33684711 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2020] [Revised: 02/17/2021] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To ensure the well-being of their patients, health care providers (HCPs) are putting more effort into the quality of the communication they provide in oncology clinics. With the emergence of Health Information Technology (HIT), the dynamics between doctors and patients in oncology settings have changed. The purpose of this literature review is to explore and demonstrate how various health information technologies impact doctor-patient communication in oncology settings. METHOD A systematic literature review was conducted in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore) to select publications that are in English, published between January 2009 and September 2020. This review reports outcomes related to the impacts of using health information technologies on doctor-patient communication according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA). RESULTS We identified 31 studies which satisfied the selection and eligibility criteria. The review revealed a diverse range of HIT used to support communication between cancer patients and their HCPs in oncology settings. Outcomes related to communication were examined to demonstrate how technology can improve access to care in clinical settings and online. When technology is used effectively to support patient knowledge and shared understanding, this increases the patient's satisfaction and ability to manage emotions, make decisions, and progress in their treatment, in addition to increasing social support and building a stronger therapeutic alliance based on shared knowledge and transparency between clinicians and patients. CONCLUSION Technology-based solutions can help strengthen the relationship and communication between patients and their doctors. They can empower the patient's well-being, help doctors make better decisions and enhance the therapeutic alliance between them. Thus, using technology to enhance communication in healthcare settings remains beneficial if its use is structured and target oriented. Future studies should focus on comparing in-depth the difference between outpatient and inpatient settings in terms of the efforts required and the extent of the impacts from both clinicians' and cancer patients' perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Safa ElKefi
- School of Systems and Enterprises, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, 07047, USA
| | - Onur Asan
- School of Systems and Enterprises, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, 07047, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Morrison KS, Paterson C, Toohey K. The Feasibility of Exercise Interventions Delivered via Telehealth for People Affected by Cancer: A Rapid Review of the Literature. Semin Oncol Nurs 2020; 36:151092. [PMID: 33223409 DOI: 10.1016/j.soncn.2020.151092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prevalence of exercise as an adjunct therapy to cancer treatments including chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery is growing rapidly and has been shown to improve health outcomes, treatment completion rates, and quality of life in people affected by cancer. Given the complexity of delivering cancer services during coronavirus disease (COVID-19), many people who are undergoing cancer treatment are unable to access exercise services. This review aims to investigate: (1) the feasibility of exercise telehealth interventions for individuals diagnosed with cancer; and (2) the impact of exercise telehealth interventions for people affected by cancer on physical and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS/DATA SOURCES The literature search was conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, Medline, and Psych Info) from January 1, 2010 until May 1, 2020. All peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative studies were included irrespective of study design. Studies that investigated adults (aged ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of any cancer, irrespective of treatment type, cancer stage or primary/secondary nature of disease were included. RESULTS Twenty-nine studies (a total of 3698 participants across the included studies) were synthesized. Across the included studies the interventions were broadly classified into four main areas of telehealth: web-based, mobile applications, SMS messaging, and telephone interventions. CONCLUSION Participants across the studies showed good compliance, symptom relief and reported an overall positive experience using telehealth for exercise. There were no adverse events reported in these studies. Given the current COVID-19 pandemic, more research is required to assess the feasibility of telehealth platforms such as Zoom, Skype, Microsoft Teams, or FaceTime, and to determine the overall participant and exercise professional telehealth exercise delivery experience. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE Telehealth uses telecommunications technology as a tool to deliver health care to populations with limited access to cancer care. Quality care of a person living with cancer requires multidisciplinary team-based care and telecommunications technology can support interprofessional care. This review has underscored that telecommunications is a critical tool in the delivery of cancer care to enable timely ongoing support for exercise interventions for those affected by cancer. It remains important for people affected by cancer to continue to engage in and maintain regular exercise under the guidance of qualified health professionals in keeping with evidence-based clinical guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Catherine Paterson
- Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia; Prehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Public Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia; Canberra Health Services & ACT Health, SYNERGY Nursing & Midwifery Research Centre, Canberra Hospital, Garran, ACT, Australia; Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
| | - Kellie Toohey
- Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia; Prehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Tan KK, Lim TZ, Chew E, Chow WM, Koh GCH. Colorectal cancer patients can be advocates for colorectal cancer screening for their siblings: A study on siblings' perspectives. Psychooncology 2020; 29:2028-2032. [PMID: 32715510 DOI: 10.1002/pon.5496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2020] [Revised: 07/06/2020] [Accepted: 07/22/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study was performed to explore in-depth, the issues and barriers pertaining to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening amongst the siblings of CRC patients in view of their higher risk of developing CRC. METHODS A qualitative study of siblings of CRC patients was performed from August 2017 to October 2018. Semi-structured interviewed were performed until data saturation was achieved. The data was then thematically analysed. RESULTS A total of 36 siblings of CRC patients, with a median age of 59 (range 39-78) years old completed the interviews. All the interviews were conducted alone with the participants. Each interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. None of the participants has undergone screening colonoscopy prior to the interviews. After thematic analysis, five themes were identified. These include: (i) Misunderstanding their own risk of developing colorectal cancer; (ii) Misperceptions of the role of "screening" for colorectal cancer.; (iii) Misconception of the CRC screening modality for FDRs; (iv) Barriers and facilitators of undergoing screening; (v) Misperceptions of national healthcare policies. CONCLUSIONS Identifying and addressing the identified barriers for these siblings to undergo screening colonoscopy is easily attainable. A multi-pronged approach should also be adopted to address the various concerns so as to reduce the incidence of CRC amongst these higher risk individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ker-Kan Tan
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.,Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Tian-Zhi Lim
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Emily Chew
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Wen-Min Chow
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Gerald Choon-Huat Koh
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Champion VL, Christy SM, Rakowski W, Lairson DR, Monahan PO, Gathirua-Mwangi WG, Stump TE, Biederman EB, Kettler CD, Rawl SM. An RCT to Increase Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening. Am J Prev Med 2020; 59:e69-e78. [PMID: 32690203 PMCID: PMC8867905 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2019] [Revised: 02/05/2020] [Accepted: 03/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Adherence to breast and colorectal cancer screenings reduce mortality from these cancers, yet screening rates remain suboptimal. This 2 × 2 RCT compared 3 theory-based interventions to usual care to simultaneously increase breast and colon cancer screening in women who were nonadherent to both screenings at study entry. DESIGN RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS Women (n=692) who were nonadherent to both breast and colon cancer screenings and aged 51-75 years were recruited. Enrollment, intervention delivery, and data collection were completed between 2013 and 2017, and data analyzed in 2018. INTERVENTION The randomized intervention included the following 4 groups: 3 intervention arms (personally tailored messages using a web-based intervention, phone delivery by a trained navigator, or both) compared with usual care. Women at an average risk for colon cancer were allowed to select either colonoscopy or stool test as their preferred colon cancer screening. Mammography was promoted for breast cancer screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Outcome data at 6 months included self-report and medical records for screening activity. RESULTS All intervention arms significantly increased receipt of either a mammogram or stool test compared with control (web: p<0.0249, phone: p<0.0001, web + phone: p<0.0001). When considering receipt of both mammogram and stool test, all intervention arms were significantly different from usual care (web: p<0.0249, phone: p<0.0003, web + phone: p<0.0001). In addition, women who were adherent to mammography had a 4.5 times greater odds of becoming adherent to colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS The tailored intervention simultaneously supporting both breast and colon cancer screenings significantly improved rates of obtaining one of the screenings and increased receipt of both tests. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study is registered with the clinical trials identifier NCT03279198 at www.clinicaltrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria L Champion
- Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana; Indiana University Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana.
| | - Shannon M Christy
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Division of Population Science, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida; Department of Oncologic Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
| | | | - David R Lairson
- School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas
| | - Patrick O Monahan
- Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Wambui G Gathirua-Mwangi
- Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Timothy E Stump
- Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, Indiana; Department of Psychology, Purdue School of Science, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Erika B Biederman
- Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Carla D Kettler
- Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Susan M Rawl
- Department of Science of Nursing Care, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Soriano CT, McGarrity TJ, Zhu J, Loloi J, Peiffer LP, Cooper J. An Electronic Questionnaire to Survey Colorectal Cancer Screening Status and Identify High-Risk Cohorts in Large Health Care Organizations. Am J Med Qual 2020; 36:163-170. [PMID: 32605378 DOI: 10.1177/1062860620937236] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Though improved screening practices have reduced the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), screening rates continue to be suboptimal. This is especially true of high-risk individuals, who are difficult for clinicians to identify during a typical health care encounter. The authors developed an electronic patient questionnaire that determined an individual's CRC screening status and identified high-risk individuals. The questionnaire was administered to employees through the Department of Human Resources. The response rate was 44.7%; 81.2% of respondents aged ≥50 years were up-to-date on CRC screening; 878 high-risk individuals were identified, 77.7% of whom were up-to-date on CRC screening. However, among high-risk individuals aged 40 to 49 years, only 45.8% reported up-to-date CRC screening. The questionnaire was effective in measuring CRC screening rates and identifying high-risk individuals. Dissemination by the Department of Human Resources was novel, effective, and was not dependent on a health care encounter to assess screening or high-risk status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher T Soriano
- Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Butterly LF. Proven Strategies for Increasing Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2020; 30:377-392. [PMID: 32439077 DOI: 10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Although colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented or detected early through screening and surveillance, barriers that lower adherence to screening significantly limit its effectiveness. Therefore, implementation of interventions that address and overcome adherence barriers is critical to efforts to decrease morbidity and mortality from CRC. This article reviews the current available evidence about interventions to increase adherence to CRC screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lynn F Butterly
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Effectiveness of tailored communication intervention in increasing colonoscopy screening rates amongst first-degree relatives of individuals with colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2020; 101:103397. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2019] [Revised: 05/29/2019] [Accepted: 08/10/2019] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
|
35
|
Millar MM, Elena JW, Gallicchio L, Edwards SL, Carter ME, Herget KA, Sweeney C. The feasibility of web surveys for obtaining patient-reported outcomes from cancer survivors: a randomized experiment comparing survey modes and brochure enclosures. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19:208. [PMID: 31730474 PMCID: PMC6858678 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 10/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Central cancer registries are often used to survey population-based samples of cancer survivors. These surveys are typically administered via paper or telephone. In most populations, web surveys obtain much lower response rates than paper surveys. This study assessed the feasibility of web surveys for collecting patient-reported outcomes via a central cancer registry. Methods Potential participants were sampled from Utah Cancer Registry records. Sample members were randomly assigned to receive a web or paper survey, and then randomized to either receive or not receive an informative brochure describing the cancer registry. We calculated adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare response likelihood and the demographic profile of respondents across study arms. Results The web survey response rate (43.2%) was lower than the paper survey (50.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (adjusted risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.72, 1.07). The brochure also did not significantly influence the proportion responding (adjusted risk ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.25). There were few differences in the demographic profiles of respondents across the survey modes. Older age increased likelihood of response to a paper questionnaire but not a web questionnaire. Conclusions Web surveys of cancer survivors are feasible without significantly influencing response rates, but providing a paper response option may be advisable particularly when surveying older individuals. Further examination of the varying effects of brochure enclosures across different survey modes is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. .,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.
| | - Joanne W Elena
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Lisa Gallicchio
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Kimberly A Herget
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.,Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Cir of Hope Dr. Salt, Lake City, UT, 84112, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Millar MM, Elena JW, Gallicchio L, Edwards SL, Carter ME, Herget KA, Sweeney C. The feasibility of web surveys for obtaining patient-reported outcomes from cancer survivors: a randomized experiment comparing survey modes and brochure enclosures. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019. [PMID: 31730474 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9:10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Central cancer registries are often used to survey population-based samples of cancer survivors. These surveys are typically administered via paper or telephone. In most populations, web surveys obtain much lower response rates than paper surveys. This study assessed the feasibility of web surveys for collecting patient-reported outcomes via a central cancer registry. METHODS Potential participants were sampled from Utah Cancer Registry records. Sample members were randomly assigned to receive a web or paper survey, and then randomized to either receive or not receive an informative brochure describing the cancer registry. We calculated adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare response likelihood and the demographic profile of respondents across study arms. RESULTS The web survey response rate (43.2%) was lower than the paper survey (50.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (adjusted risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.72, 1.07). The brochure also did not significantly influence the proportion responding (adjusted risk ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.25). There were few differences in the demographic profiles of respondents across the survey modes. Older age increased likelihood of response to a paper questionnaire but not a web questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Web surveys of cancer survivors are feasible without significantly influencing response rates, but providing a paper response option may be advisable particularly when surveying older individuals. Further examination of the varying effects of brochure enclosures across different survey modes is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. .,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.
| | - Joanne W Elena
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Lisa Gallicchio
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Kimberly A Herget
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.,Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Cir of Hope Dr. Salt, Lake City, UT, 84112, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Paskett ED, Bernardo BM, Young GS, Katz ML, Reiter PL, Tatum CM, Oliveri JM, DeGraffinreid CR, Gray DM, Pearlman R, Hampel H. Comparative Effectiveness of Two Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening for Those at Increased Risk Based on Family History: Results of a Randomized Trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2019; 29:3-9. [PMID: 31666284 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-19-0797] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2019] [Revised: 09/19/2019] [Accepted: 10/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND First-degree relatives (FDR) of patients with colorectal cancer are at risk for colorectal cancer, but may not be up to date with colorectal cancer screening. We sought to determine whether a one-time recommendation about needing colorectal cancer screening using patient navigation (PN) was better than just receiving the recommendation only. METHODS Participants were FDRs of patients with Lynch syndrome-negative colorectal cancer from participating Ohio hospitals. FDRs from 259 families were randomized to a website intervention (528 individuals), which included a survey and personal colorectal cancer screening recommendation, while those from 254 families were randomized to the website plus telephonic PN intervention (515 individuals). Primary outcome was adherence to the personal screening recommendation (to get screened or not to get screened) received from the website. Secondary outcomes examined who benefited from adding PN. RESULTS At the end of the 14-month follow-up, 78.6% of participants were adherent to their recommendation for colorectal cancer screening with adherence similar between arms (P = 0.14). Among those who received a recommendation to have a colonoscopy immediately, the website plus PN intervention significantly increased the odds of receiving screening, compared with the website intervention (OR: 2.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.68-5.28). CONCLUSIONS Addition of PN to a website intervention did not improve adherence to a colorectal cancer screening recommendation overall; however, the addition of PN was more effective in increasing adherence among FDRs who needed screening immediately. IMPACT These findings provide important information as to when the additional costs of PN are needed to assure colorectal cancer screening among those at high risk for colorectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Electra D Paskett
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. .,Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - Gregory S Young
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Mira L Katz
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Paul L Reiter
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Cathy M Tatum
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jill M Oliveri
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - Darrell Mason Gray
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.,College of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Rachel Pearlman
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Heather Hampel
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Bauer A, Riemann JF, Seufferlein T, Reinshagen M, Hollerbach S, Haug U, Unverzagt S, Boese S, Ritter-Herschbach M, Jahn P, Frese T, Harris M, Landenberger M. Invitation to Screening Colonoscopy in the Population at Familial Risk for Colorectal Cancer. DEUTSCHES ARZTEBLATT INTERNATIONAL 2019; 115:715-722. [PMID: 30518470 DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2018] [Revised: 01/19/2018] [Accepted: 05/30/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Screening colonoscopy can lower the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC), yet participation rates are low even in groups at high risk. The goal of this study was to double the rate of participation in screening colonoscopy among persons at familial risk and then to determine the frequency of neoplasia in this risk group. METHODS In a nationwide, cluster-randomized, multicenter study, first-degree relatives (FDR) of patients with CRC across Germany received written informational materials concerning the familial risk of CRC, along with an invitation to undergo colonoscopy. Participants in the intervention group were additionally counseled by nurses over the telephone. The primary endpoint of the study was colonoscopy uptake within 30 days. RESULTS The participants' mean age was 50.8 years. The colonoscopy uptake rates were 99/125 (79%) in the intervention group and 97/136 (71%) in the control group (RR = 1.11; 95% confidence interval [0.97; 1.28]). A polypectomy was performed in 72 of 196 asymptomatic persons (37%). In 13 cases (7%), an advanced neoplasia was detected; two of these persons had colon cancer (stages T0 and T1). 42% of the participants expressed barriers against colonoscopy. 22 reported mild side effects; there were no serious side effects. CONCLUSION Additional counseling by nurses over the telephone does not increase the participation rate. Approaching patients who have CRC is an opportunity to increase the participation of their first-degree relatives in screening colonoscopy. The frequency of neoplasia that was found in this study underscores the need to screen relatives even before they reach the usual age threshold for screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Bauer
- Institute for General Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Halle-Wittenberg, Halle; Institute for Health and Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Halle-Wittenberg, Halle; Director Emeritus, Department of Medicine C, Ludwigshafen Hospital, c/o LebensBlicke Foundation, Ludwigshafen; Department of Internal Medicine I, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm; Department of Medicine I, Braunschweig Municipal Hospital, Braunschweig; Department of Gastroenterology, Celle General Hospital, Celle; Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen; Faculty of Human and Health Sciences, University of Bremen; Institute for Medical Epidemiology, Biometrics, and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Halle-Wittenberg, Halle; Nursing Research Unit, Halle University Hospital, Halle: Madeleine Ritter-Herschbach, MScN, RN; Department for Health, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Kruger V, Redlinger‐Grosse K, Walters ST, Ash E, Cragun D, McCarthy Veach P, Zierhut HA. Development of a motivational interviewing genetic counseling intervention to increase cascade cholesterol screening in families of children with familial hypercholesterolemia. J Genet Couns 2019; 28:1059-1064. [DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Valerie Kruger
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development University of Minnesota—Twin Cities Minneapolis Minnesota
| | - Krista Redlinger‐Grosse
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development University of Minnesota—Twin Cities Minneapolis Minnesota
| | - Scott T. Walters
- School of Public Health University of North Texas Health Science Center Fort Worth Texas
| | - Erin Ash
- Genetic Counseling Program Sarah Lawrence College Broxville New York
| | - Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health University of South Florida Tampa Florida
| | - Patricia McCarthy Veach
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development University of Minnesota—Twin Cities Minneapolis Minnesota
| | - Heather A. Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development University of Minnesota—Twin Cities Minneapolis Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Esplen MJ, Harrington S, Leung YW, Aronson M, Rothenmund H, Semotiuk K, Wong J, Gallinger S, Dicks E, McLaughlin J. Telephone versus in-person colorectal cancer risk and screening intervention for first-degree relatives: A randomized controlled trial. Cancer 2019; 125:2272-2282. [PMID: 30861097 PMCID: PMC6742581 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2018] [Revised: 01/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/01/2019] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Having a first-degree relative (FDR) with colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant risk factor for CRC. Counseling for FDRs regarding CRC risk factors and personalized risk is important to improve knowledge and screening compliance. METHODS A 3-arm randomized controlled trial compared tailored in-person and telephone CRC counseling interventions with controls among FDRs who were not mutation carriers for known hereditary cancer syndromes, but who were considered to be at an increased risk based on family history. It was hypothesized that both telephone and in-person approaches would increase CRC knowledge, screening adherence, perceived risk accuracy, and psychosocial functioning compared with controls. The authors anticipated greater satisfaction with the in-person approach. CRC knowledge, risk perception, psychosocial functioning, and intention to screen were assessed at baseline and at 2-week and 2-month follow-ups (primary endpoint). RESULTS A total of 278 FDRs (mean age, 47.4 years, standard deviation, 11.38 years) participated. At baseline, participants reported low to moderate CRC knowledge and overestimations of risk. Screening adherence was 73.7%. At 2 months, participants in the in-person arm and telephone arm demonstrated improvements in knowledge and perceived risk and were not found to be statistically different from each other. However, when comparing each intervention with controls, knowledge in the in-person arm was found to be statistically significantly higher, but the difference between the telephone and control arms was not. Cancer-related stress reduced over time in all groups. Intervention benefits were maintained at 1 year. Baseline screening intent/adherence were high, and therefore did not reach statistically significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS Tailored in-person or telephone formats for providing CRC risk counseling, incorporating behavioral interventions, appear to improve knowledge and risk perceptions, with high client satisfaction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Jane Esplen
- de Souza Institute, University Health Network (UHN)
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, UHN
| | | | - Yvonne W Leung
- de Souza Institute, University Health Network (UHN)
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto
| | - Melyssa Aronson
- Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry, Mount Sinai Hospital
| | - Heidi Rothenmund
- Winnipeg Regional Health Authority; Department of Genetics & Metabolism, Health Sciences Centre in Winnipeg
| | - Kara Semotiuk
- Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry, Mount Sinai Hospital
| | - Jiahui Wong
- de Souza Institute, University Health Network (UHN)
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto
| | - Steven Gallinger
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, UHN
- Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry, Mount Sinai Hospital
| | - Elizabeth Dicks
- Faculty of Medicine: Center for Health Informatics and Analytics, Memorial University
| | - John McLaughlin
- Public Health Ontario
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
McGarragle KM, Hare C, Holter S, Facey DA, McShane K, Gallinger S, Hart TL. Examining intrafamilial communication of colorectal cancer risk status to family members and kin responses to colonoscopy: a qualitative study. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2019; 17:16. [PMID: 31391872 PMCID: PMC6595615 DOI: 10.1186/s13053-019-0114-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2018] [Accepted: 06/03/2019] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Background First-degree relatives (FDRs) of probands with colorectal cancer (CRC) may be at increased risk of CRC and require colonoscopy. Proband disclosure about this risk and need for colonoscopy is essential for FDRs to take appropriate action. Low colonoscopy rates are reported among FDRs and little is known about the proband disclosure process. A better understanding of the barriers surrounding colonoscopy and disclosure is needed. Methods CRC probands (n = 16) and FDRs (n = 9), recruited from a Canadian CRC Consortium, completed interviews to determine barriers to disclosure and colonoscopy, respectively. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis and participants’ motivation to disclose to FDRs or undertake colonoscopy was categorized into Stages of Change (i.e., Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, or Maintenance) using the transtheoretical model. Results 25% of probands had not disclosed to any first-degree kin and were categorized in the Precontemplation or Contemplation Stage of Change. Barriers to disclosure included lack of information, negative expectations about familial reaction, assuming FDRs were aware of risk or already being screened, dysfunctional family dynamics, and cultural barriers. 75% of FDRs were categorized in the Precontemplation or Contemplation Stage of Change. Barriers included negative perceptions about colonoscopy, health-care provider related factors, practical concerns, and lack of information about CRC, risk, and colonoscopy. Conclusions In the absence of barriers such as cost and accessibility, this Canadian sample still reported several challenges to disclosure and colonoscopy adherence. Future research should explore interventions such as motivational interviewing to improve proband disclosure and to increase FDR adherence to colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Crystal Hare
- 1Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3 Canada
| | - Spring Holter
- 2Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Sinai Health System, Box 24-60 Murray Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3L9 Canada
| | - Dorian Anglin Facey
- 2Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Sinai Health System, Box 24-60 Murray Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3L9 Canada
| | - Kelly McShane
- 1Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3 Canada
| | - Steven Gallinger
- 2Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Sinai Health System, Box 24-60 Murray Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3L9 Canada.,3Department of General Surgery, Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth St., 10EN, Room 206, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4 Canada
| | - Tae L Hart
- 1Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3 Canada.,2Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Sinai Health System, Box 24-60 Murray Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3L9 Canada.,4Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, 250 College Street, Toronto, ON M5T 1R8 Canada
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Millar MM, Kinney AY, Camp NJ, Cannon-Albright LA, Hashibe M, Penson DF, Kirchhoff AC, Neklason DW, Gilsenan AW, Dieck GS, Stroup AM, Edwards SL, Bateman C, Carter ME, Sweeney C. Predictors of Response Outcomes for Research Recruitment Through a Central Cancer Registry: Evidence From 17 Recruitment Efforts for Population-Based Studies. Am J Epidemiol 2019. [PMID: 30689685 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwz011:10.1093/aje/kwz011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
When recruiting research participants through central cancer registries, high response fractions help ensure population-based representation. We conducted multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to identify case and study characteristics associated with making contact with and obtaining cooperation of Utah cancer cases using data from 17 unique recruitment efforts undertaken by the Utah Cancer Registry (2007-2016) on behalf of the following studies: A Population-Based Childhood Cancer Survivors Cohort Study in Utah, Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation for Prostate Cancer (CEASAR Study), Costs and Benefits of Follow-up Care for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancers, Study of Exome Sequencing for Head and Neck Cancer Susceptibility Genes, Genetic Epidemiology of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Impact of Remote Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling (Family CARE Project), Massively Parallel Sequencing for Familial Colon Cancer Genes, Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) Surveillance Study, Osteosarcoma Surveillance Study, Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study, Risk Education and Assessment for Cancer Heredity Project (REACH Project), Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis and Tumor Subtyping in High-Risk Breast-Cancer Gene Pedigrees, Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis for Localizing Multiple Myeloma Genes. Characteristics associated with lower odds of contact included Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio (OR) = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 0.41), nonwhite race (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.60), and younger age at contact. Years since diagnosis was inversely associated with making contact. Nonwhite race and age ≥60 years had lower odds of cooperation. Study features with lower odds of cooperation included longitudinal design (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.61) and study brochures (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.90). Increased odds of cooperation were associated with including a questionnaire (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.54, 6.59), postage stamps (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.12), and incentives (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.57). Among cases not responding after the first contact, odds of eventual response were lower when >10 days elapsed before subsequent contact (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.85). Obtaining high response is challenging, but study features identified in this analysis support better results when recruiting through central cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Nicola J Camp
- Division of Hematology and Hematological Malignancies, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Lisa A Cannon-Albright
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Mia Hashibe
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - David F Penson
- Urologic Surgery, Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.,Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Anne C Kirchhoff
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Division of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Deborah W Neklason
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Alicia W Gilsenan
- Department of Epidemiology, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
| | - Gretchen S Dieck
- Safety, Epidemiology, and Risk Management, United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,New Jersey State Cancer Registry, New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carrie Bateman
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Millar MM, Kinney AY, Camp NJ, Cannon-Albright LA, Hashibe M, Penson DF, Kirchhoff AC, Neklason DW, Gilsenan AW, Dieck GS, Stroup AM, Edwards SL, Bateman C, Carter ME, Sweeney C. Predictors of Response Outcomes for Research Recruitment Through a Central Cancer Registry: Evidence From 17 Recruitment Efforts for Population-Based Studies. Am J Epidemiol 2019; 188:928-939. [PMID: 30689685 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwz011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2018] [Revised: 01/09/2019] [Accepted: 01/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
When recruiting research participants through central cancer registries, high response fractions help ensure population-based representation. We conducted multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to identify case and study characteristics associated with making contact with and obtaining cooperation of Utah cancer cases using data from 17 unique recruitment efforts undertaken by the Utah Cancer Registry (2007-2016) on behalf of the following studies: A Population-Based Childhood Cancer Survivors Cohort Study in Utah, Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation for Prostate Cancer (CEASAR Study), Costs and Benefits of Follow-up Care for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancers, Study of Exome Sequencing for Head and Neck Cancer Susceptibility Genes, Genetic Epidemiology of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Impact of Remote Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling (Family CARE Project), Massively Parallel Sequencing for Familial Colon Cancer Genes, Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) Surveillance Study, Osteosarcoma Surveillance Study, Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study, Risk Education and Assessment for Cancer Heredity Project (REACH Project), Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis and Tumor Subtyping in High-Risk Breast-Cancer Gene Pedigrees, Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis for Localizing Multiple Myeloma Genes. Characteristics associated with lower odds of contact included Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio (OR) = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 0.41), nonwhite race (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.60), and younger age at contact. Years since diagnosis was inversely associated with making contact. Nonwhite race and age ≥60 years had lower odds of cooperation. Study features with lower odds of cooperation included longitudinal design (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.61) and study brochures (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.90). Increased odds of cooperation were associated with including a questionnaire (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.54, 6.59), postage stamps (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.12), and incentives (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.57). Among cases not responding after the first contact, odds of eventual response were lower when >10 days elapsed before subsequent contact (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.85). Obtaining high response is challenging, but study features identified in this analysis support better results when recruiting through central cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Nicola J Camp
- Division of Hematology and Hematological Malignancies, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Lisa A Cannon-Albright
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Mia Hashibe
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - David F Penson
- Urologic Surgery, Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
- Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Anne C Kirchhoff
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Division of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Deborah W Neklason
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Alicia W Gilsenan
- Department of Epidemiology, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
| | - Gretchen S Dieck
- Safety, Epidemiology, and Risk Management, United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- New Jersey State Cancer Registry, New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carrie Bateman
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Wu Y, Liang Y, Zhou Q, Liu H, Lin G, Cai W, Li Y, Gu J. Effectiveness of a short message service intervention to motivate people with positive results in preliminary colorectal cancer screening to undergo colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial. Cancer 2019; 125:2252-2261. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2018] [Revised: 01/31/2019] [Accepted: 02/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Yanan Wu
- Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health; Sun Yat-Sen University; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Yingru Liang
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Qin Zhou
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Huazhang Liu
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Guozhen Lin
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Wenfeng Cai
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Yan Li
- Department of Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| | - Jing Gu
- Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health; Sun Yat-Sen University; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
- Sun Yat-Sen Global Health Institute, Institute of State Governance; Sun Yat-Sen University; Guangzhou People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Rising KL, Ward MM, Goldwater JC, Bhagianadh D, Hollander JE. Framework to Advance Oncology-Related Telehealth. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2018; 2:1-11. [DOI: 10.1200/cci.17.00156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose As telehealth is increasingly used across the clinical care spectrum to provide patient-centered care, it is important to have robust measures to assess its impact on patient outcomes and care processes. The National Quality Forum (NQF) developed a Telehealth Framework to organize measures and inform target areas for measure development that includes the following four domains: access to care, financial impact or cost, experience, and effectiveness. Our goal is to identify and categorize within the NQF domains currently existing measures of telehealth applicable to oncology to detect priority areas for future research and measure development. Methods We reviewed telehealth-related measures applied to oncology care reported in systematic reviews and identified NQF-endorsed quality measures related to oncology care potentially amenable to telehealth. We organized identified measures by the NQF domains to inform suggestions for advancing the care of patients with cancer through telehealth. Results We identified 12 systematic reviews representing 183 studies reporting telehealth-related oncology research. Most studied outcomes related to diagnosis and treatment or user experience and symptom monitoring. Clinical effectiveness measures were most frequently reported (38%), and most were psychosocial. Patient, family, and/or caregiver experience was the next most frequently reported measure. There were only a few other cancer-related clinical effectiveness measures (eg, morbidity). Most NQF-endorsed oncology measures amenable to telehealth applied to the domains of access to care and effectiveness, with a lack of measures informing financial impact or cost and experience. Conclusion Overall, there has been a lack of quality measures to assess use of telehealth for the care of oncology patients. Future work should focus on developing measures within each of the NQF-identified domains, with special attention to the financial impact or cost domain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin L. Rising
- Kristin L. Rising, Thomas Jefferson University; Judd E. Hollander, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Marcia M. Ward, Rural Telehealth Research Center, University of Iowa; Divya Bhagianadh, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; and Jason C. Goldwater, National Quality Forum, Washington, DC
| | - Marcia M. Ward
- Kristin L. Rising, Thomas Jefferson University; Judd E. Hollander, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Marcia M. Ward, Rural Telehealth Research Center, University of Iowa; Divya Bhagianadh, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; and Jason C. Goldwater, National Quality Forum, Washington, DC
| | - Jason C. Goldwater
- Kristin L. Rising, Thomas Jefferson University; Judd E. Hollander, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Marcia M. Ward, Rural Telehealth Research Center, University of Iowa; Divya Bhagianadh, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; and Jason C. Goldwater, National Quality Forum, Washington, DC
| | - Divya Bhagianadh
- Kristin L. Rising, Thomas Jefferson University; Judd E. Hollander, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Marcia M. Ward, Rural Telehealth Research Center, University of Iowa; Divya Bhagianadh, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; and Jason C. Goldwater, National Quality Forum, Washington, DC
| | - Judd E. Hollander
- Kristin L. Rising, Thomas Jefferson University; Judd E. Hollander, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Marcia M. Ward, Rural Telehealth Research Center, University of Iowa; Divya Bhagianadh, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; and Jason C. Goldwater, National Quality Forum, Washington, DC
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Abstract
Telemedicine uses telecommunications technology as a tool to deliver health care to populations with limited access to care. Telemedicine has been tested in multiple clinical settings, demonstrating at least equivalency to in-person care and high levels of patient and health professional satisfaction. Teleoncology has been demonstrated to improve access to care and decrease health care costs. Teleconsultations may take place in a synchronous, asynchronous, or blended format. Examples of successful teleoncology applications include cancer telegenetics, bundling of cancer-related teleapplications, remote chemotherapy supervision, symptom management, survivorship care, palliative care, and approaches to increase access to cancer clinical trials. Telepathology is critical to cancer care and may be accomplished synchronously and asynchronously for both cytology and tissue diagnoses. Mobile applications support symptom management, lifestyle modification, and medication adherence as a tool for home-based care. Telemedicine can support the oncologist with access to interactive tele-education. Teleoncology practice should maintain in-person professional standards, including documentation integrated into the patient's electronic health record. Telemedicine training is essential to facilitate rapport, maximize engagement, and conduct an accurate virtual exam. With the appropriate attachments, the only limitation to the virtual exam is palpation. The national telehealth resource centers can provide interested clinicians with the latest information on telemedicine reimbursement, parity, and practice. To experience the gains of teleoncology, appropriate training, education, as well as paying close attention to gaps, such as those inherent in the digital divide, are essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Joseph Sirintrapun
- From Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Ana Maria Lopez
- From Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Kinney AY, Howell R, Ruckman R, McDougall JA, Boyce TW, Vicuña B, Lee JH, Guest DD, Rycroft R, Valverde PA, Gallegos KM, Meisner A, Wiggins CL, Stroup A, Paddock LE, Walters ST. Promoting guideline-based cancer genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in ethnically and geographically diverse cancer survivors: Rationale and design of a 3-arm randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials 2018; 73:123-135. [PMID: 30236776 PMCID: PMC6214814 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2018] [Revised: 09/06/2018] [Accepted: 09/08/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although national guidelines for cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have been available for over two decades, less than half of high-risk women have accessed these services, especially underserved minority and rural populations. Identification of high-risk individuals is crucial for cancer survivors and their families to benefit from biomedical advances in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. METHODS This paper describes community-engaged formative research and the protocol of the ongoing randomized 3-arm controlled Genetic Risk Assessment for Cancer Education and Empowerment (GRACE) trial. Ethnically and geographically diverse breast and ovarian cancer survivors at increased risk for hereditary cancer predisposition who have not had a CGRA are recruited through the three statewide cancer registries. The specific aims are to: 1) compare the effectiveness of a targeted intervention (TP) vs. a tailored counseling and navigation(TCN) intervention vs. usual care (UC) on CGRA utilization at 6 months post-diagnosis (primary outcome); compare the effectiveness of the interventions on genetic counseling uptake at 12 months after removal of cost barriers (secondary outcome); 2) examine potential underlying theoretical mediating and moderating mechanisms; and 3) conduct a cost evaluation to guide dissemination strategies. DISCUSSION The ongoing GRACE trial addresses an important translational gap by developing and implementing evidence-based strategies to promote guideline-based care and reduce disparities in CGRA utilization among ethnically and geographically diverse women. If effective, these interventions have the potential to reach a large number of high-risk families and reduce disparities through broad dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03326713; clinicaltrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey.
| | - Rachel Howell
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Rachel Ruckman
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Jean A McDougall
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Tawny W Boyce
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Belinda Vicuña
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Ji-Hyun Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Dolores D Guest
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Randi Rycroft
- Colorado Central Cancer Registry, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Denver, CO, United States
| | - Patricia A Valverde
- Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States
| | | | - Angela Meisner
- New Mexico Tumor Registry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Charles L Wiggins
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; New Mexico Tumor Registry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Antoinette Stroup
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey
| | - Lisa E Paddock
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey
| | - Scott T Walters
- Department of Health Behavior and Health Systems, University of North Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health, Fort Worth, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Perisetti A, Khan H, George NE, Yendala R, Rafiq A, Blakely S, Rasmussen D, Villalpando N, Goyal H. Colorectal cancer screening use among insured adults: Is out-of-pocket cost a barrier to routine screening? World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther 2018. [PMID: 30191078 DOI: 10.4292/wjgpt.v9.i4.31.] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To describe the characteristics of adults who needed to see a doctor in the past year but could not due to the extra cost and assess the impact of limited financial resources on the receipt of routine fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy for colon cancer screening among insured patients. METHODS Data obtained from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System included 215436 insured adults age 50-75 years. We computed frequencies, adjusted odds ratios (aORs), and 95%CIs using SAS v9.3 software. RESULTS Nine percent of the study population needed to see a doctor in the past year but could not because of cost. The numbers were significantly higher among those aged 50-64 (P < 0.0001), Non-Hispanic Whites (P < 0.0001), and those with a primary care physician (P < 0.0001) among other factors. Adjusting for possible confounders, aORs for not seeing the doctor in the past year because of cost were: stool occult blood test within last year aOR = 0.88; 95%CI: 0.76-1.02, sigmoidoscopy within last year aOR = 0.72; 95%CI: 0.48-1.07, colonoscopy within the last year aOR = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.81-1.02. CONCLUSION We found that the limited financial resources within the past 12 mo were significantly associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) non-screening. Patients with risk factors identified in this study should adhere to CRC guidelines and should receive financial help if needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhilash Perisetti
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States
| | - Hafiz Khan
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Nayana E George
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arkansas Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States
| | - Rachana Yendala
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Aamrin Rafiq
- Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, United States
| | - Summre Blakely
- School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Drew Rasmussen
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Nathan Villalpando
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Hemant Goyal
- Department of Internal Medicine, Mercer University School of Medicine, Macon, GA 31201, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Perisetti A, Khan H, George NE, Yendala R, Rafiq A, Blakely S, Rasmussen D, Villalpando N, Goyal H. Colorectal cancer screening use among insured adults: Is out-of-pocket cost a barrier to routine screening? World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther 2018; 9:31-38. [PMID: 30191078 PMCID: PMC6125137 DOI: 10.4292/wjgpt.v9.i4.31] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2018] [Revised: 08/20/2018] [Accepted: 08/27/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To describe the characteristics of adults who needed to see a doctor in the past year but could not due to the extra cost and assess the impact of limited financial resources on the receipt of routine fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy for colon cancer screening among insured patients.
METHODS Data obtained from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System included 215436 insured adults age 50-75 years. We computed frequencies, adjusted odds ratios (aORs), and 95%CIs using SAS v9.3 software.
RESULTS Nine percent of the study population needed to see a doctor in the past year but could not because of cost. The numbers were significantly higher among those aged 50-64 (P < 0.0001), Non-Hispanic Whites (P < 0.0001), and those with a primary care physician (P < 0.0001) among other factors. Adjusting for possible confounders, aORs for not seeing the doctor in the past year because of cost were: stool occult blood test within last year aOR = 0.88; 95%CI: 0.76-1.02, sigmoidoscopy within last year aOR = 0.72; 95%CI: 0.48-1.07, colonoscopy within the last year aOR = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.81-1.02.
CONCLUSION We found that the limited financial resources within the past 12 mo were significantly associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) non-screening. Patients with risk factors identified in this study should adhere to CRC guidelines and should receive financial help if needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhilash Perisetti
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States
| | - Hafiz Khan
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Nayana E George
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arkansas Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States
| | - Rachana Yendala
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Aamrin Rafiq
- Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, United States
| | - Summre Blakely
- School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Drew Rasmussen
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Nathan Villalpando
- Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States
| | - Hemant Goyal
- Department of Internal Medicine, Mercer University School of Medicine, Macon, GA 31201, United States
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Champion VL, Christy SM, Rakowski W, Gathirua-Mwangi WG, Tarver WL, Carter-Harris L, Cohee AA, Marley AR, Jessup NM, Biederman E, Kettler CD, Stump TE, Monahan P, Lairson DR, Rawl SM. A Randomized Trial to Compare a Tailored Web-Based Intervention and Tailored Phone Counseling to Usual Care for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018; 27:1433-1441. [PMID: 30181203 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-18-0180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2018] [Revised: 05/01/2018] [Accepted: 08/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer mortality could be decreased with risk-appropriate cancer screening. We examined the efficacy of three tailored interventions compared with usual care for increasing screening adherence. METHODS Women (n = 1,196) ages 51 to 74, from primary care networks and nonadherent to colorectal cancer guidelines, were randomized to (1) usual care, (2) tailored Web intervention, (3) tailored phone intervention, or (4) tailored Web + phone intervention. Average-risk women could select either stool test or colonoscopy, whereas women considered at higher than average risk received an intervention that supported colonoscopy. Outcome data were collected at 6 months by self-report, followed by medical record confirmation (attrition of 23%). Stage of change for colorectal cancer screening (precontemplation or contemplation) was assessed at baseline and 6 months. RESULTS The phone (41.7%, P < 0.0001) and combined Web + phone (35.8%, P < 0.001) interventions significantly increased colorectal cancer screening by stool test compared with usual care (11.1%), with ORs ranging from 5.4 to 6.8 in models adjusted for covariates. Colonoscopy completion did not differ between groups except that phone significantly increased colonoscopy completion compared with usual care for participants in the highest tertile of self-reported fear of cancer. CONCLUSIONS A tailored phone with or without a Web component significantly increased colorectal cancer screening compared with usual care, primarily through stool testing, and phone significantly increased colonoscopy compared with usual care but only among those with the highest levels of baseline fear. IMPACT This study supports tailored phone counseling with or without a Web program for increasing colorectal cancer screening in average-risk women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria L Champion
- Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana. .,Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Shannon M Christy
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Division of Population Science, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida.,Department of Psychology, Purdue School of Science, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, Indiana
| | | | | | - Will L Tarver
- HSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Lisa Carter-Harris
- Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.,Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Andrea A Cohee
- Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.,Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Andrew R Marley
- Department of Epidemiology, IU Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | | | | | - Carla D Kettler
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Timothy E Stump
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Patrick Monahan
- Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana.,Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - David R Lairson
- University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, Houston Texas
| | - Susan M Rawl
- Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.,Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
| |
Collapse
|