Long-term results from a randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers

Heal the Healers: A pilot study evaluating the feasibility, acceptability, and exploratory efficacy of a Transcendental Meditation intervention for emergency clinicians during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Emergency clinicians face elevated rates of burnout that result in poor outcomes for clinicians, patients, and health systems. The objective of this single-arm pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility of a Transcendental Meditation (TM) intervention for emergency clinicians during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to explore the potential effectiveness in improving burnout, sleep, and psychological health.

METHODS

Emergency clinicians (physicians, nurses, and physician-assistants) from 2 urban hospitals were recruited to participate in TM instruction (8 individual or group in-person and remote sessions) for 3 months. Session attendance was the primary feasibility outcome (prespecified as attending 6/8 sessions), and burnout was the primary clinical outcome. Participant-reported measures of feasibility and validated measures of burnout, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbance, and stress were collected at baseline and the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models were used.

RESULTS

Of the 14 physicians (46%), 7 nurses (22%), and 10 physician-assistants (32%) who participated, 61% were female (n = 19/32). TM training and at-home meditation practice was feasible for clinicians as 90.6% (n = 29/32) attended 6/8 training sessions and 80.6% self-reported meditating at least once a day on average. Participants demonstrated significant reductions in burnout (P < .05; effect sizes, Cohen's d = 0.43-0.45) and in symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and sleep disturbance (P values < .001; Cohen's d = 0.70-0.87).

CONCLUSION

TM training was feasible for emergency clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and led to significant reductions in burnout and psychological symptoms. TM is a safe and effective meditation tool to improve clinicians' well-being.

Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2011. Worldwide, cervical cancer is the fourth commonest cancer affecting women. High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is causative in 99.7% of cases. Other risk factors include smoking, multiple sexual partners, the presence of other sexually transmitted diseases and immunosuppression. Primary prevention strategies for cervical cancer focus on reducing HPV infection via vaccination and data suggest that this has the potential to prevent nearly 90% of cases in those vaccinated prior to HPV exposure. However, not all countries can afford vaccination programmes and, worryingly, uptake in many countries has been extremely poor. Secondary prevention, through screening programmes, will remain critical to reducing cervical cancer, especially in unvaccinated women or those vaccinated later in adolescence. This includes screening for the detection of pre-cancerous cells, as well as high-risk HPV. In the UK, since the introduction of the Cervical Screening Programme in 1988, the associated mortality rate from cervical cancer has fallen. However, worldwide, there is great variation between countries in both coverage and uptake of screening. In some countries, national screening programmes are available whereas in others, screening is provided on an opportunistic basis. Additionally, there are differences within countries in uptake dependent on ethnic origin, age, education and socioeconomic status. Thus, understanding and incorporating these factors in screening programmes can increase the uptake of screening. This, together with vaccination, can lead to cervical cancer becoming a rare disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at women, to increase the uptake, including informed uptake, of cervical screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 6, 2020. MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS databases up to June 2020. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase uptake/informed uptake of cervical screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis using standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

Comprehensive literature searches identified 2597 records; of these, 70 met our inclusion criteria, of which 69 trials (257,899 participants) were entered into a meta-analysis. The studies assessed the effectiveness of invitational and educational interventions, lay health worker involvement, counselling and risk factor assessment. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity between trials limited statistical pooling of data. Overall, there was moderate-certainty evidence to suggest that invitations appear to be an effective method of increasing uptake compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49 to 1.96; 141,391 participants; 24 studies). Additional analyses, ranging from low to moderate-certainty evidence, suggested that invitations that were personalised, i.e. personal invitation, GP invitation letter or letter with a fixed appointment, appeared to be more successful. More specifically, there was very low-certainty evidence to support the use of GP invitation letters as compared to other authority sources' invitation letters within two RCTs, one RCT assessing 86 participants (RR 1.69 95% CI 0.75 to 3.82) and another, showing a modest benefit, included over 4000 participants (RR 1.13, 95 % CI 1.05 to 1.21). Low-certainty evidence favoured personalised invitations (telephone call, face-to-face or targeted letters) as compared to standard invitation letters (RR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.11 to 1.21; 27,663 participants; 5 studies). There was moderate-certainty evidence to support a letter with a fixed appointment to attend, as compared to a letter with an open invitation to make an appointment (RR 1.61, 95 % CI 1.48 to 1.75; 5742 participants; 5 studies). Low-certainty evidence supported the use of educational materials (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.54; 63,415 participants; 13 studies) and lay health worker involvement (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.65; 4330 participants; 11 studies). Other less widely reported interventions included counselling, risk factor assessment, access to a health promotion nurse, photo comic book, intensive recruitment and message framing. It was difficult to deduce any meaningful conclusions from these interventions due to sparse data and low-certainty evidence. However, having access to a health promotion nurse and attempts at intensive recruitment may have increased uptake. One trial reported an economic outcome and randomised 3124 participants within a national screening programme to either receive the standard screening invitation, which would incur a fee, or an invitation offering screening free of charge. No difference in the uptake at 90 days was found (574/1562 intervention versus 612/1562 control, (RR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03). The use of HPV self-testing as an alternative to conventional screening may also be effective at increasing uptake and this will be covered in a subsequent review. Secondary outcomes, including cost data, were incompletely documented. The majority of cluster-RCTs did not account for clustering or adequately report the number of clusters in the trial in order to estimate the design effect, so we did not selectively adjust the trials. It is unlikely that reporting of these trials would impact the overall conclusions and robustness of the results. Of the meta-analyses that could be performed, there was considerable statistical heterogeneity, and this should be borne in mind when interpreting these findings. Given this and the low to moderate evidence, further research may change these findings. The risk of bias in the majority of trials was unclear, and a number of trials suffered from methodological problems and inadequate reporting. We downgraded the certainty of evidence because of an unclear or high risk of bias with regards to allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence to support the use of invitation letters to increase the uptake of cervical screening. Low-certainty evidence showed lay health worker involvement amongst ethnic minority populations may increase screening coverage, and there was also support for educational interventions, but it is unclear what format is most effective. The majority of the studies were from developed countries and so the relevance of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is unclear. Overall, the low-certainty evidence that was identified makes it difficult to infer as to which interventions were best, with exception of invitational interventions, where there appeared to be more reliable evidence.

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations in the United States experience disparities in the use of preventive health services.

PURPOSE

To examine effects of barriers that create health disparities in 10 recommended preventive services for adults, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services database (1 January 1996 to 5 July 2019); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials, observational studies with comparison groups, and systematic reviews of populations adversely affected by disparities that reported effects of barriers on use of any of the 10 selected preventive services or that reported the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities in use of a preventive service by improving intermediate or clinical outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Dual extraction and assessment of study quality, strength of evidence, and evidence applicability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No studies reported effects of provider-specific barriers on preventive service use. Eighteen studies reporting effects of patient barriers, such as insurance coverage or lack of a regular provider, on preventive service use had mixed and inconclusive findings. Studies of patient-provider interventions (n = 12), health information technologies (n = 11), and health system interventions (n = 88) indicated higher cancer screening rates with patient navigation; telephone calls, prompts, and other outreach methods; reminders involving lay health workers; patient education; risk assessment, counseling, and decision aids; screening checklists; community engagement; and provider training. Single studies showed that clinician-delivered and technology-assisted interventions improved rates of smoking cessation and weight loss, respectively.

LIMITATION

Insufficient or low strength of evidence and applicability for most interventions except patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers.

CONCLUSION

In populations adversely affected by disparities, patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers increase cancer screening.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109263).

Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) is recommended by all major US medical organizations but remains underused.

OBJECTIVE

To identify interventions associated with increasing CRC screening rates and their effect sizes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1, 1996, to August 31, 2017. Key search terms included colorectal cancer and screening.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of US-based interventions in clinical settings designed to improve CRC screening test completion in average-risk adults.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

At least 2 investigators independently extracted data and appraised each study's risk of bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain either a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) for screening completion for each type of intervention.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was completion of CRC screening. Examination included interventions to increase completion of (1) initial CRC screening by any recommended modality, (2) colonoscopy after an abnormal initial screening test result, and (3) continued rounds of annual fecal blood tests (FBTs).

RESULTS

The main review included 73 randomized clinical trials comprising 366 766 patients at low or medium risk of bias. Interventions that were associated with increased CRC screening completion rates compared with usual care included FBT outreach (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.81-2.81; RD, 22%; 95% CI, 17%-27%), patient navigation (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.46; RD, 18%; 95% CI, 13%-23%), patient education (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; RD, 4%; 95% CI, 1%-6%), patient reminders (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; RD, 3%; 95% CI, 0%-5%), clinician interventions of academic detailing (RD, 10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%), and clinician reminders (RD, 13%; 95% CI, 8%-19%). Combinations of interventions (clinician interventions or navigation added to FBT outreach) were associated with greater increases than single components (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; RD, 7%; 95% CI, 3%-11%). Repeated mailed FBTs with navigation were associated with increased annual FBT completion (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.91-2.29; RD, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-49%). Patient navigation was not associated with colonoscopy completion after an initial abnormal screening test result (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.60; RD, 14%; 95% CI, 0%-29%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Fecal blood test outreach and patient navigation, particularly in the context of multicomponent interventions, were associated with increased CRC screening rates in US trials. Fecal blood test outreach should be incorporated into population-based screening programs. More research is needed on interventions to increase adherence to continued FBTs, follow-up of abnormal initial screening test results, and cost-effectiveness and other implementation barriers for more intensive interventions, such as navigation.

A readily available improvement over method of moments for intra-cluster correlation estimation in the context of cluster randomized trials and fitting a GEE-type marginal model for binary outcomes

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Cluster randomized trials are popular in health-related research due to the need or desire to randomize clusters of subjects to different trial arms as opposed to randomizing each subject individually. As outcomes from subjects within the same cluster tend to be more alike than outcomes from subjects within other clusters, an exchangeable correlation arises that is measured via the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. Intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimation is especially important due to the increasing awareness of the need to publish such values from studies in order to help guide the design of future cluster randomized trials. Therefore, numerous methods have been proposed to accurately estimate the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, with much attention given to binary outcomes. As marginal models are often of interest, we focus on intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimation in the context of fitting such a model with binary outcomes using generalized estimating equations. Traditionally, intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimation with generalized estimating equations has been based on the method of moments, although such estimators can be negatively biased. Furthermore, alternative estimators that work well, such as the analysis of variance estimator, are not as readily applicable in the context of practical data analyses with generalized estimating equations. Therefore, in this article we assess, in terms of bias, the readily available residual pseudo-likelihood approach to intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimation with the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Furthermore, we study a possible corresponding approach to confidence interval construction for the intra-cluster correlation coefficient.

METHODS

We utilize a simulation study and application example to assess bias in intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimates obtained from GLIMMIX using residual pseudo-likelihood. This estimator is contrasted with method of moments and analysis of variance estimators which are standards of comparison. The approach to confidence interval construction is assessed by examining coverage probabilities.

RESULTS

Overall, the residual pseudo-likelihood estimator performs very well. It has considerably less bias than moment estimators, which are its competitor for general generalized estimating equation-based analyses, and therefore, it is a major improvement in practice. Furthermore, it works almost as well as analysis of variance estimators when they are applicable. Confidence intervals have near-nominal coverage when the intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimate has negligible bias.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that the residual pseudo-likelihood estimator is a good option for intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimation when conducting a generalized estimating equation-based analysis of binary outcome data arising from cluster randomized trials. The estimator is practical in that it is simply a result from fitting a marginal model with GLIMMIX, and a confidence interval can be easily obtained. An additional advantage is that, unlike most other options for performing generalized estimating equation-based analyses, GLIMMIX provides analysts the option to utilize small-sample adjustments that ensure valid inference.

Effect of reminders mailed to general practitioners on colorectal cancer screening adherence: a cluster-randomized trial

Reminders have been used in various settings, but failed to produce convincing evidence of benefits on patient adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of sending general practitioners (GPs) printed reminders about CRC screening. We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial involving 144 GPs in the Val-de-Marne district (France), who provided care for any reason to 20 778 patients eligible for CRC screening between June 2010 and November 2011. Data were collected from the main statutory health-insurance programme and local cancer screening agency. GPs were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 proportion to the intervention or the control group. Every 4 months, intervention-group GPs received a computer-generated printed list of patients who had not performed scheduled faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening. The primary outcome was patient adherence to FOBT screening or exclusion from CRC screening for medical reasons. The screening adherence rate was 31.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 30.3-32.1] in the control group and 32.9% (95% CI 32.0-33.8) in the intervention group [crude relative risk, 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.09), P<0.01]. This rate was not significantly different between groups by multilevel modelling accounting for clustering and confounding variables [adjusted relative risk, 1.07 (95% CI 0.95-1.20), P=0.27]. Computer-generated printed reminders sent to GPs did not significantly improve patient adherence to organized CRC screening by the FOBT.

Inequalities in cervical cancer screening utilisation and results: A comparison between Italian natives and immigrants from disadvantaged countries

Cervical cancer screening underutilisation is documented among immigrants from poor countries and it is associated to an augmented risk for severe lesions. In a cohort of 1,410,364 Italian women and 200,491 immigrants from poor countries differences in screening participation and results were investigated. Participation rate was lower for immigrants than for Italians: 43.98% versus 48.59% (chi(1): p<0.001). This gap increased with age (ptrend<0.0001). Some socio-demographic factors negatively influenced immigrants' participation. Illiteracy (OR=0.75) versus secondary school, being single (OR=0.71) versus attached, first screens (OR=0.67) versus subsequent ones. Although the interaction between educational and professional levels showed that graduated immigrant women conducting an intellectual job have a higher inclination towards screening than their Italian peers (OR=1.43 vs OR=1.04). The Standardised Detection Ratio (SDR) suggested a frequency of severe lesions nearly double among immigrants in first screens (SDR=1.94; 95% CI: 1.82-2.08) and even higher (SDR=2.53; 95% CI: 2.35-2.73) for Central/Eastern Europeans. Multi-component interventions involving both patients and providers offer the greatest potential to increase cervical cancer screening uptake within foreign-born populations. So immigrant-specific interventions are needed for some immigrant groups, like Central/Eastern Europeans who are at higher risk of cervical lesions and, together with Asians and Africans, showed a poor attitude towards cancer prevention.

Reasons for never and intermittent completion of colorectal cancer screening after receiving multiple rounds of mailed fecal tests

Background

Long-term adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is particularly important for fecal testing. Some U.S. studies report that only 25% of individuals repeat fecal testing annually. The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by patients with suboptimal screening adherence to refine interventions for starting ongoing adherence to CRC screening. We also explored whether participants, particularly never screeners, would be willing to do a CRC screening blood test.

Methods

Forty-one patients who previously enrolled in the Systems of Support to Increase CRC Screening (SOS) trial were interviewed 4–5 years later. Participants were purposively selected to include men and women with diverse race/ethnicities who had either been inconsistent screeners or had never screened during the first three years of SOS despite receiving at least two rounds of mailed fecal tests. Two interviewers conducted 30-min telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. An iterative thematic analysis approach was used.

Results

Themes related to screening barriers were more pervasive among never screeners including: (1) Avoidance (inattention, procrastination) (2) Concerns about handling stool; (3) Health concerns; (4) Fear of a cancer diagnosis or positive test results. Themes related to screening facilitators were more often mentioned by participants who screened at least once including: (1) Use of a simpler 1-sample fecal test; (2) Convenience of mailings and doing the test at home; (3) Salience of prevention, especially as one got older; and (4) Influence of recommendations from providers, family and friends. Participants had diverse preferences for the number (3 on average) and types (phone, mail, text) of screening reminders. Some participants did not prefer e-mail links to the patient shared electronic health record because of difficulties remembering their password. It was acceptable for a nurse or medical assistant not from their clinic to call them as long as that person was knowledgeable about their records and could communicate with their physician. Participants, especially never screeners, were generally very enthusiastic about the potential option of a CRC screening blood test.

Conclusion

Future CRC screening programs should be designed to minimize these barriers and maximize facilitators to improve long-term screening adherence.

Trial registration

Primary Funding Agency: The National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA121125). Registered at clinicaltrials.govNCT00697047.

Practice facilitation for improving cardiovascular care: secondary evaluation of a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial using population-based administrative data

BACKGROUND

Practice facilitation (PF), a multifaceted approach in which facilitators (external health care professionals) help family physicians to improve their adoption of best practices, has been highly successful. Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) was an innovative PF trial designed to improve evidence-based care for people who have, or are at risk of, cardiovascular disease (CVD). The intervention was found to be ineffective as assessed by a patient-level composite score based on chart reviews from a subsample of patients (N = 5292). Here, we used population-based administrative data to examine IDOCC's effect on CVD-related hospitalizations.

METHODS

IDOCC used a pragmatic, stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled design involving primary care providers recruited across Eastern Ontario, Canada. IDOCC's effect on CVD-related hospitalizations was assessed in the 2 years of active intervention and post-intervention years. Marginal and mixed-effects regression analyses were used to account for the study design and to control for patient, physician, and practice characteristics. Secondary and subgroup analyses investigated robustness.

RESULTS

Our sample included 262,996 patient/year observations representing 54,085 unique patients who had, or were at risk of, CVD, from 70 practices. There was a strong decreasing secular trend in CVD-related hospitalizations but no statistically significant effect of IDOCC. Relative to patients in the control condition, patients in the intervention condition were estimated to have 4 % lower odds of CVD-related hospitalizations (adjOR = 0.96, 99 % CI 0.83 to 1.11). The nonsignificant result persisted across robustness analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes from administrative databases were examined to form a more complete picture of the (in)effectiveness of a large-scale quality improvement intervention. IDOCC did not have a significant effect on CVD hospitalizations, suggesting that the results from the primary composite adherence score analysis were neither due to choice of outcome nor relatively short follow-up period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00574808 , registered on 14 December 2007.

A real-world stepped wedge cluster randomized trial of practice facilitation to improve cardiovascular care

BACKGROUND

Practice facilitation has been associated with meaningful improvements in disease prevention and quality of patient care. Using practice facilitation, the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project aimed to improve the delivery of evidence-based cardiovascular care in primary care practices across a large health region. Our goal was to evaluate IDOCC's impact on adherence to processes of care delivery.

METHODS

A pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized trial recruiting primary care providers in practices located in Eastern Ontario, Canada (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00574808). Participants were randomly assigned by region to one of three steps. Practice facilitators were intended to visit practices every 3-4 (year 1-intensive) or 6-12 weeks (year 2-sustainability) to support changes in practice behavior. The primary outcome was mean adherence to indicators of evidence-based care measured at the patient level. Adherence was assessed by chart review of a randomly selected cohort of 66 patients per practice in each pre-intervention year, as well as in year 1 and year 2 post-intervention.

RESULTS

Eighty-four practices (182 physicians) participated. On average, facilitators had 6.6 (min: 2, max: 11) face-to-face visits with practices in year 1 and 2.5 (min: 0 max: 10) visits in year 2. We collected chart data from 5292 patients. After adjustment for patient and provider characteristics, there was a 1.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): -2.9 to -0.9 %) and 4.2 % (95 % CI: -5.7 to -2.6 %) absolute decrease in mean adherence from baseline to intensive and sustainability years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

IDOCC did not improve adherence to best-practice guidelines. Our results showed a small statistically significant decrease in mean adherence of questionable clinical significance. Potential reasons for this result include implementation challenges, competing priorities in practices, a broad focus on multiple chronic disease indicators, and use of an overall index of adherence. These results contrast with findings from previously reported facilitation trials and highlight the complexities and challenges of translating research findings into clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00574808.

Impact of continued mailed fecal tests in the patient-centered medical home: Year 3 of the Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-Up randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The current study was conducted to determine the effect of continuing a centralized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) mailed program on screening adherence.

METHODS

A patient-level randomized controlled trial was conducted in 21 patient-centered medical home primary care clinics between January 2010 and November 2012. A total of 2208 patients ranging in age from 52 to 75 years in a substudy of the Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-Up (SOS) trial were randomized at year 3 to continued automated interventions (Continued group), which included mailed information regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening choices, and were mailed stool kit tests or to a group in which interventions were stopped (Stopped group). The main outcomes and measures were the completion of CRC screening in year 3 and by subgroup characteristics, respectively.

RESULTS

Adherence to CRC screening in year 3 was found to be significantly higher in patients in the Continued group compared with those in the Stopped group (53.3% vs 37.3%; adjusted net difference, 15.6% [P<.001]). This difference was entirely due to greater completion of FOBT (adjusted net difference, 18.0% [P<.001]). Year 3 CRC screening rates were highest in patients in the Continued group completing FOBT in both years 1 and 2 (77.2%), followed by patients completing only 1 FOBT in 1 of the 2 years (44.6%), with low rates of CRC testing reported among patients not completing any FOBT within the first 2 years (18.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

A centralized mailed FOBT CRC screening program continued to be more effective than patient-centered medical home usual-care interventions, but only for those patients who had previously completed FOBT testing. Research is needed regarding how to engage patients not completing CRC testing after being mailed at least 2 rounds of FOBT tests. Cancer 2016;122:312-321. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Appalachian women's perspectives on breast and cervical cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

Although breast and cervical cancer screening rates have been increasing over the three past decades, many Appalachian women in the USA do not receive screening, leading to disproportionate mortality rates. The aims of this study were to: (1) better understand barriers to and facilitators of breast and cervical cancer screening among Appalachian women; and (2) identify strategies to increase cancer screening.

METHODS

Eight focus groups and 19 key informant interviews were conducted with 79 participants. Tape-recorded session were transcribed and content analyzed.

RESULTS

Findings consistent with screening determinants research include: inadequate personal and community resources, attitudinal and knowledge barriers, and competing demands. Less commonly described factors include family cancer history, personal health habits, and the multiple influences of healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Interpreting findings in terms of consumer information processing theory, healthcare providers and supports play a key role in educating and influencing the screening uptake among Appalachian Kentucky women. These findings have the potential to inform innovative and culturally consonant intervention approaches capable of increasing screening and decreasing mortality rates.

An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Screening decreases colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, yet almost half of age-eligible patients are not screened at recommended intervals.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether interventions using electronic health records (EHRs), automated mailings, and stepped increases in support improve CRC screening adherence over 2 years.

DESIGN

4-group, parallel-design, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessments. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00697047)

SETTING

21 primary care medical centers.

PATIENTS

4675 adults aged 50 to 73 years not current for CRC screening.

INTERVENTION

Usual care, EHR-linked mailings ("automated"), automated plus telephone assistance ("assisted"), or automated and assisted plus nurse navigation to testing completion or refusal ("navigated"). Interventions were repeated in year 2.

MEASUREMENTS

The proportion of participants current for screening in both years, defined as colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy (year 1) or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in year 1 and FOBT, colonoscopy, or sigmoidoscopy (year 2).

RESULTS

Compared with those in the usual care group, participants in the intervention groups were more likely to be current for CRC screening for both years with significant increases by intensity (usual care, 26.3% [95% CI, 23.4% to 29.2%]; automated, 50.8% [CI, 47.3% to 54.4%]; assisted, 57.5% [CI, 54.5% to 60.6%]; and navigated, 64.7% [CI, 62.5% to 67.0%]; P < 0.001 for all pair-wise comparisons). Increases in screening were primarily due to increased uptake of FOBT being completed in both years (usual care, 3.9% [CI, 2.8% to 5.1%]; automated, 27.5% [CI, 24.9% to 30.0%]; assisted, 30.5% [CI, 27.9% to 33.2%]; and navigated, 35.8% [CI, 33.1% to 38.6%]).

LIMITATION

Participants were required to provide verbal consent and were more likely to be white and to participate in other types of cancer screening, limiting generalizability.

CONCLUSION

Compared with usual care, a centralized, EHR-linked, mailed CRC screening program led to twice as many persons being current for screening over 2 years. Assisted and navigated interventions led to smaller but significant stepped increases compared with the automated intervention only. The rapid growth of EHRs provides opportunities for spreading this model broadly.

Program to improve colorectal cancer screening in a low-income, racially diverse population: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE More effective strategies are needed to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening, particularly among the poor, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals with limited English proficiency. We examined whether the direct mailing of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) kits to patients overdue for such screening is an effective way to improve screening in this population. METHODS All adults aged 50 to 80 years who did not have documentation of being up to date with colorectal cancer screening as of December 31, 2009, and who had had at least 2 visits to the community health center in the prior 18 months were randomized to the outreach intervention or usual care. Patients in the outreach group were mailed a colorectal cancer fact sheet and FOBT kit. Patients in the usual care group could be referred for screening during usual clinician visits. The primary outcome was completion of colorectal cancer screening (by FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy) 4 months after initiation of the outreach protocol. Outcome measures were compared using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS Analyses were based on 104 patients assigned to the outreach intervention and 98 patients assigned to usual care. In all, 30% of patients in the outreach group completed colorectal cancer screening during the study period, compared with 5% of patients in the usual care group (P <.001). Nearly all of the screenings were by FOBT. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to the percentage of patients making a clinician visit or the percentage for whom a clinician placed an order for a screening test. CONCLUSIONS The mailing of FOBT kits directly to patients was efficacious for promoting colorectal cancer screening among a population with high levels of poverty, limited English proficiency, and racial and ethnic diversity. Non-visit-based outreach to patients may be an important strategy to address suboptimal rates of colorectal cancer screening among populations most at risk for not being screened.

Interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening: an integrative review

Behavior change interventions to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have targeted people in community and primary care settings, health care providers, and health systems. Randomized controlled trials provide the strongest evidence of intervention efficacy. The purpose of this integrative review was to evaluate trials of CRC screening interventions published between 1997 and 2007 and to identify knowledge gaps and future directions for research. Thirty-three randomized trials that met inclusion criteria were evaluated using a modified version of the TREND criteria. Significant intervention effects were reported in 6 of 10 trials focused on increasing fecal occult blood testing, 4 of 7 trials focused on sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy completion, and 9 of 16 trials focused on completion of any screening test. Several effective interventions to promote CRC screening were identified. Future trials need to use theory to guide interventions, examine moderators and mediators, consistently report results, and use comparable outcome measures.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of practice facilitation within primary care settings

PURPOSE

This study was a systematic review with a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the overall effect size of practice facilitation and possible moderating factors. The primary outcome was the change in evidence-based practice behavior calculated as a standardized mean difference.

METHODS

In this systematic review, we searched 4 electronic databases and the reference lists of published literature reviews to find practice facilitation studies that identified evidence-based guideline implementation within primary care practices as the outcome. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published from 1966 to December 2010 in English language only peer-reviewed journals. Reviews of each study were conducted and assessed for quality; data were abstracted, and standardized mean difference estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Publication bias, influence, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies contributed to the analysis for a total of 1,398 participating practices: 697 practice facilitation intervention and 701 control group practices. The degree of variability between studies was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone (I2 = 20%). An overall effect size of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.68) favored practice facilitation (z = 8.76; P <.001), and publication bias was evident. Primary care practices are 2.76 (95% CI, 2.18-3.43) times more likely to adopt evidence-based guidelines through practice facilitation. Meta-regression analysis indicated that tailoring (P = .05), the intensity of the intervention (P = .03), and the number of intervention practices per facilitator (P = .004) modified evidence-based guideline adoption.

CONCLUSION

Practice facilitation has a moderately robust effect on evidence-based guideline adoption within primary care. Implementation fidelity factors, such as tailoring, the number of practices per facilitator, and the intensity of the intervention, have important resource implications.

Factors influencing colorectal cancer screening participation

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major health problem worldwide. Although population-based CRC screening is strongly recommended in average-risk population, compliance rates are still far from the desirable rates. High levels of screening uptake are necessary for the success of any screening program. Therefore, the investigation of factors influencing participation is crucial prior to design and launches a population-based organized screening campaign. Several studies have identified screening behaviour factors related to potential participants, providers, or health care system. These influencing factors can also be classified in non-modifiable (i.e., demographic factors, education, health insurance, or income) and modifiable factors (i.e., knowledge about CRC and screening, patient and provider attitudes or structural barriers for screening). Modifiable determinants are of great interest as they are plausible targets for interventions. Interventions at different levels (patient, providers or health care system) have been tested across the studies with different results. This paper analyzes factors related to CRC screening behaviour and potential interventions designed to improve screening uptake.

Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening

BACKGROUND

World-wide, cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women. Increasing the uptake of screening, alongside increasing informed choice is of great importance in controlling this disease through prevention and early detection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at women, to increase the uptake, including informed uptake, of cervical cancer screening.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 1, 2009. MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases up to March 2009. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase uptake/informed uptake of cervical cancer screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-eight trials met our inclusion criteria. These trials assessed the effectiveness of invitational and educational interventions, counselling, risk factor assessment and procedural interventions. Heterogeneity between trials limited statistical pooling of data. Overall, however, invitations appear to be effective methods of increasing uptake. In addition, there is limited evidence to support the use of educational materials. Secondary outcomes including cost data were incompletely documented so evidence was limited. Most trials were at moderate risk of bias. Informed uptake of cervical screening was not reported in any trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to support the use of invitation letters to increase the uptake of cervical screening. There is limited evidence to support educational interventions but it is unclear what format is most effective. The majority of the studies are from developed countries and so the relevance to developing countries is unclear.

Cluster randomized trials of cancer screening interventions: are appropriate statistical methods being used?

The design and analysis of cluster randomized trials can require more sophistication than individually randomized trials. However, the need for statistical methods that account for the clustered design has not always been appreciated, and past reviews have found widespread deficiencies in methodology and reporting. We reviewed cluster randomized trials of cancer screening interventions published in 1995-2010 to determine whether the use of appropriate statistical methods had increased over time. Literature searches yielded 50 articles reporting outcome analyses of cluster randomized trials of breast, cervix and colorectal cancer screening interventions. Of studies published in 1995-1999, 2000-2002, 2003-2006 and 2007-2010, 55% (6/11), 82% (9/11), 92% (12/13) and 60% (9/15) used appropriate analytic methods, respectively. Results were suggestive of a peak in 2003-2006 (p =.06) followed by a decline in 2007-2010 (p =.08). While the sample of studies was small, these results indicate that many cluster randomized trials of cancer screening interventions have had deficiencies in the application of correct statistical procedures for the outcome analysis, and that increased adoption of appropriate methods in the early and mid-2000's may not have been sustained.

Infrastructure for large-scale quality-improvement projects: early lessons from North Carolina Improving Performance in Practice

INTRODUCTION

Little is known regarding how to accomplish large-scale health care improvement. Our goal is to improve the quality of chronic disease care in all primary care practices throughout North Carolina.

METHODS

Methods for improvement include (1) common quality measures and shared data system; (2) rapid cycle improvement principles; (3) quality-improvement consultants (QICs), or practice facilitators; (4) learning networks; and (5) alignment of incentives. We emphasized a community-based strategy and developing a statewide infrastructure. Results are reported from the first 2 years of the North Carolina Improving Performance in Practice (IPIP) project.

RESULTS

A coalition was formed to include professional societies, North Carolina AHEC, Community Care of North Carolina, insurers, and other organizations. Wave One started with 18 practices in 2 of 9 regions of the state. Quality-improvement consultants recruited practices. Over 80 percent of practices attended all quarterly regional meetings. In 9 months, almost all diabetes measures improved, and a bundled asthma measure improved from 33 to 58 percent. Overall, the magnitude of improvement was clinically and statistically significant (P = .001). Quality improvements were maintained on review 1 year later. Wave Two has spread to 103 practices in all 9 regions of the state, with 42 additional practices beginning the enrollment process.

DISCUSSION

Large-scale health care quality improvement is feasible, when broadly supported by statewide leadership and community infrastructure. Practice-collected data and lack of a control group are limitations of the study design. Future priorities include maintaining improved sustainability for practices and communities. Our long-term goal is to transform all 2000 primary-care practices in our state.

Analysis of group randomized trials with multiple binary endpoints and small number of groups

The group randomized trial (GRT) is a common study design to assess the effect of an intervention program aimed at health promotion or disease prevention. In GRTs, groups rather than individuals are randomized into intervention or control arms. Then, responses are measured on individuals within those groups. A number of analytical problems beset GRT designs. The major problem emerges from the likely positive intraclass correlation among observations of individuals within a group. This paper provides an overview of the analytical method for GRT data and applies this method to a randomized cancer prevention trial, where multiple binary primary endpoints were obtained. We develop an index of extra variability to investigate group-specific effects on response. The purpose of the index is to understand the influence of individual groups on evaluating the intervention effect, especially, when a GRT study involves a small number of groups. The multiple endpoints from the GRT design are analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model and the stepdown Bonferroni method of Holm.

Uptake in cancer screening programmes

For cancer screening programmes to bring about reductions in mortality, a substantial proportion of the population must participate. Programmes with low uptake can be ineffective and can promote inequalities in health-service provision. Strategies to promote uptake are multifaceted, reflecting differences in the cancers targeted, invitees, health-service contexts, and the tests themselves. Accordingly, there is no universal approach. Strategies should accommodate the many factors that can influence uptake and should incorporate the need to promote informed choice. Screening has the potential to cause harm, and there is an ethical imperative to seek out strategies that provide balanced information on cancer screening. Further research is needed to assess newer approaches to promoting uptake, such as IT-based programmes, and to identify strategies that are balanced, self-sustaining, and affordable.

Design and analysis of group-randomized trials in cancer: a review of current practices

BACKGROUND

Previous reviews have identified problems in the design and analysis of group-randomized trials in a number of areas. Similar problems may exist in cancer research, but there have been no comprehensive reviews.

METHODS

We searched Medline and PubMed for group-randomized trials focused on cancer prevention and control that were published between 2002 and 2006. We located and reviewed 75 articles to determine whether articles included evidence of taking group randomization into account in establishing the size of the trial, such as reporting the expected intraclass correlation, the group component of variance, or the variance inflation factor. We also examined the analytical approaches to determine their appropriateness.

RESULTS

Only 18 (24%) of the 75 articles documented appropriate methods for sample size calculations. Only 34 (45%) limited their reports to analyses judged to be appropriate. Fully 26 (34%) failed to report any analyses that were judged to be appropriate. The most commonly used inappropriate analysis was an analysis at the individual level that ignored the groups altogether. Nine articles (12%) did not provide sufficient information.

CONCLUSIONS

Many investigators who use group-randomized trials in cancer research do not adequately attend to the special design and analytic challenges associated with these trials. Failure to do so can lead to reporting type I errors as real effects, mislead investigators and policy-makers, and slow progress toward control and prevention of cancer. A collaborative effort by investigators, statisticians, and others will be required to ensure that group-randomized trials are planned and analyzed using appropriate methods so that the scientific community can have confidence in the published results.

Interventions to enhance breast cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment among racial and ethnic minority women

The authors conduct a systematic review of the literature to identify interventions designed to enhance breast cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment among minority women. Most trials in this area have focused on breast cancer screening, while relatively few have addressed diagnostic testing or breast cancer treatment. Among patient-targeted screening interventions, those that are culturally tailored or addressed financial or logistical barriers are generally more effective than reminder-based interventions, especially among women with fewer financial resources and those without previous mammography. Chart-based reminders increase physician adherence to mammography guidelines but are less effective at increasing clinical breast examination. Several trials demonstrate that case management is an effective strategy for expediting diagnostic testing after screening abnormalities have been found. Additional support for these and other proven health care organization-based interventions appears justified and may be necessary to eliminate racial and ethnic breast cancer disparities.

The effects of teamwork and system support on colorectal cancer screening in primary care practices

BACKGROUND

While cancer screening is generally increasing in the U.S., colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low. Most CRC screening interventions focus either on patients or individual clinicians without examining the office context in which CRC screening is implemented. This study examines whether primary care practices that involve staff in general forms of health education have higher CRC screening rates than practices that do not.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from 22 New Jersey and Pennsylvania family medicine practices were analyzed. Data include chart audits for 795 men and women eligible for CRC screening (age 50-70) and practice information surveys for each practice. Generalized estimating equations were used to determine CRC screening correlates.

RESULTS

Overall, 31.3% (n=249) of patients received CRC screening. Practices that reported using nursing or health educator staff to provide behavioral counseling to patients on topics such as diet, exercise or tobacco use were significantly more likely to also have higher CRC screening rates (z=7.30, p<0.0001). Their patients had 2.96 times increased odds of CRC screening than those in other practices (95% C.I., 2.21-3.96). Reminder system use was also associated with higher CRC screening (z=4.96, p<0.0001). In practices that used reminder systems, patients had 2.57 times increased odds of CRC screening than others (95% C.I., 1.77-3.74).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that interventions to achieve better CRC screening rates do not need to focus solely on CRC. Higher CRC rates may be achieved by capitalizing on the enhancing contributions of non-physician practice members providing more general health behavior change patient education.

Translation of an efficacious cancer-screening intervention to women enrolled in a Medicaid managed care organization

PURPOSE

An earlier randomized controlled trial of prevention care management (PCM) found significant improvement in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer-screening rates among women attending Community Health Centers but required substantial research support. This study evaluated the impact of a streamlined PCM delivered through a Medicaid managed care organization (MMCO), an infrastructure with the potential to sustain this program for the long term.

METHODS

This randomized trial was conducted within an MMCO serving New York City between May 2005 and December 2005. A total of 1,316 women aged 40 to 69 years and not up to date for at least 1 targeted cancer-screening test were randomized to either PCM or a comparison group. Women in the PCM group received up to 3 scripted telephone calls to identify barriers and provide support to obtain any needed breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer-screening tests. Women in the comparison group received a modified version of the MMCO's established mammography telephone outreach program, also in up to 3 calls. Women in both groups received a financial incentive on confirmation that they had received a mammogram. Screening status was assessed through MMCO administrative data. Groups were compared using odds ratios.

RESULTS

In an intent-to-treat comparison adjusted for baseline screening status, PCM women were 1.69 times more likely to be up-to-date for colorectal cancer-screening tests at follow-up than women in the comparison group (95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.77). Follow-up screening rates for cervical and breast cancer did not differ significantly between study groups on an intent-to-treat basis.

CONCLUSIONS

The abbreviated PCM telephone intervention was feasible to deliver through an MMCO and improved screening for 1 cancer. This approach has the potential to improve cancer-screening rates significantly in settings that can provide telephone support to women known to be overdue.

Telephone care management to improve cancer screening among low-income women: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Minority and low-income women receive fewer cancer screenings than other women.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a telephone support intervention to increase rates of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening among minority and low-income women.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial conducted between November 2001 and April 2004.

SETTING

11 community and migrant health centers in New York City.

PATIENTS

1413 women who were overdue for cancer screening.

INTERVENTION

Over 18 months, women assigned to the intervention group received an average of 4 calls from prevention care managers and women assigned to the control group received usual care. Follow-up data were available for 99% of women, and 91% of the intervention group received at least 1 call.

MEASUREMENTS

Medical record documentation of mammography, Papanicolaou testing, and colorectal cancer screening according to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.

RESULTS

The proportion of women who had mammography increased from 0.58 to 0.68 with the intervention and decreased from 0.60 to 0.58 with usual care; the proportion who had Papanicolaou testing increased from 0.71 to 0.78 with the intervention and was unchanged with usual care; and the proportion who had colorectal screening increased from 0.39 to 0.63 with the intervention and from 0.39 to 0.50 with usual care. The difference in the change in screening rates between groups was 0.12 for mammography (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.19), 0.07 for Papanicolaou testing (CI, 0.01 to 0.12), and 0.13 for colorectal screening (CI, 0.07 to 0.19). The proportion of women who were up to date for 3 tests increased from 0.21 to 0.43 with the intervention.

LIMITATIONS

Participants were from 1 city and had access to a regular source of care. Medical records may not have captured all cancer screenings.

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone support can improve cancer screening rates among women who visit community and migrant health centers. The intervention seems to be well suited to health plans, large medical groups, and other organizations that seek to increase cancer screening rates and to address disparities in care.