Patient navigation and time to diagnostic resolution: results for a cluster randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation among patients with breast cancer screening abnormalities, Tampa, FL

Disparities in Time to Diagnosis Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Multiple myeloma (MM) is one of the most diagnosed hematologic malignancies in the United States. Despite improvements in therapy, health disparities persist among patients with MM. Here, we aim to determine whether there are disparities in time to diagnosis (TTD) among MM patients with regard to income, race/ethnicity, and gender.

PATIENTS

Patients with a monoclonal protein detected in the serum and/or urine and a subsequent bone marrow biopsy confirmed diagnosis of MM were included in the study.

METHODS

We extracted data on patients with MM and assessed whether the predictor variables were associated with the primary outcome of TTD, which we define as the time between detection of a monoclonal protein in the serum or urine and bone marrow biopsy diagnosis of MM.

RESULTS

Compared to patients with commercial insurance, patients receiving Medicaid (HR: 0.408, 95% CI: 0.206-0.808; P = .010) and patients without insurance (HR: 0.428, 95% CI: 0.207-0.885; P = .022) were significantly more likely to have delayed TTD. TTD was also prolonged if the provider who ordered the testing for the detection of a monoclonal protein was not a hematologist (HR: 0.435, 95% CI: 0.284-0.668; P < .0001). No disparities were found with regard to race/ethnicity or gender.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests there may be socioeconomic disparities in TTD among patients with MM. Interventions such as patient navigation may be useful to reduce TTD among socioeconomically disadvantaged patient populations. Further studies need to be conducted to elucidate reasons for delays.

Improving Time to Diagnostic Resolution in the Breast Imaging Service: A Tertiary Center's Experience and Process of Improvement

OBJECTIVE

Breast imaging services often experience a significant degree of variability in patient flow, leading to delay in time to diagnostic resolution, commonly referred to as time to resolution (TTR). This study applies Lean Six Sigma Methodology (LSSM) to reduce TTR and enhance patient outcomes.

METHODS

This study was IRB-approved. A baseline audit was done using cases of mammographic recalls (BI-RADS 0) to measure baseline TTR. Multidisciplinary meetings with all members of the breast imaging service, alongside a study of patient complaint data, were utilized to identify issues that were causing prolonged TTR. Following that, possible solutions were proposed and implemented. A post-implementation audit was conducted, and the resulting TTRs were compared. Significant differences in TTR between the pre- and post-solution implementation were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

During the baseline audit of 8 months, 589 cases of mammographic recalls (BI-RADS 0) were identified, and the resulting average TTR was 86.3 days. During the post-implementation period of 3 months, 370 mammographic recalls (BI-RADS 0) occurred, with a resulting average TTR of 36.0 days. After applying LSSM, TTR was reduced by 58.3% (P < 0.01). Some changes implemented included training the coordinators, establishing a rapid diagnostic clinic using previously underutilized equipment, and having radiologists assigned full-time to the breast imaging service.

CONCLUSION

Our team has successfully managed to identify various causes behind the prolonged TTR using LSSM. Team collaboration was essential to study and decide on a more achievable TTR.

Barriers to Mammography Screening among Black Women at a Community Health Center in South Florida, USA

Background

In the United States (US), Black/African American women suffer disproportionately from breast cancer health disparities with a 40% higher death rate compared to White women. Mammography screening is considered a critical tool in mitigating disparities, yet Black women experience barriers to screening and are more likely to be diagnosed with advanced-stage breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to assess the relative frequency of mammography screening and to examine perceived and actual barriers to screening among women who receive care in our nurse-led community health center.

Methods

We conducted a survey examining frequency of mammography screening and beliefs about breast cancer including perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers to mammography screening, guided by the Champion Health Belief Model.

Results

A total of 30 Black/African American women completed the survey. The mean age of the participants was 54.3 years ± 9.17 (SD); 43.3% had a high school education or less; 50% had incomes below $60,000 per year; 26.7% were uninsured; 10% were on Medicaid; and only 50% were working full-time. We found that only half of the participants reported having annual mammograms 16 (53.3%), 1 (3.3%) every 6 months, 8 (26.6%) every 2-3 years, and 5 (16.7%) never had a mammogram in their lifetime. Frequently cited barriers included: 'getting a mammogram would be inconvenient for me'; 'getting a mammogram could cause breast cancer'; 'the treatment I would get for breast cancer would be worse than the cancer itself'; 'being treated for breast cancer would cause me a lot of problems'; 'other health problems would keep me from having a mammogram'; concern about pain with having a mammogram would keep me from having one; and not being able to afford a mammogram would keep me from having one'. Having no health insurance was also a barrier.

Conclusion

This study found suboptimal utilization of annual screening mammograms among low-income Black women at a community health center in Florida and women reported several barriers. Given the high mortality rate of breast cancer among Black/African American women, we have integrated a Patient Navigator in our health system to reduce barriers to breast cancer screening, follow-up care, and to facilitate timely access to treatment, thus ultimately reducing breast cancer health disparities and promoting health equity.

Patient navigation to promote lung cancer screening in a community health center for people experiencing homelessness: Protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is a major cause of death among people experiencing homelessness, with mortality rates more than double those in the general population. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could reduce lung cancer deaths in this population, although the circumstances of homelessness present multiple barriers to LCS LDCT completion. Patient navigation is a promising strategy for overcoming these barriers.

METHODS

The Investigating Navigation to Help Advance Lung Equity (INHALE) Study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of patient navigation for LCS among individuals receiving primary care at Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP). Three hundred BHCHP patients who meet Medicare/Medicaid criteria for LCS will be randomized 2:1 to usual care with (n = 200) or without (n = 100) LCS navigation. Following a structured, theory-based protocol, the patient navigator assists with each step in the LCS process, providing lung cancer education, facilitating shared decision-making visits with primary care providers (PCPs), assisting in making and attending LCS LDCT appointments, arranging follow-up when needed, and offering tobacco cessation support for smokers. The primary outcome is receipt of LCS LDCT at 6 months. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, qualitative interviews with participants and PCPs will aid in interpreting and contextualizing the trial results.

DISCUSSION

This trial will produce the first experimental evidence on patient navigation for cancer screening in a homeless health care setting. Results could inform cancer health equity efforts at the 299 Health Care for the Homeless programs that serve over 900,000 patients annually in the US.

Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal breast cancer screening mammograms in primary care: a systematic review

Background

Successful breast cancer screening relies on timely follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal mammograms undermines the potential benefits of screening and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, a comprehensive review of inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care has not previously been reported in the literature. This review could identify modifiable factors that influence follow-up, which if addressed, may lead to improved follow-up and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic literature review to determine the extent of inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms in primary care and identify factors impacting on follow-up was conducted. Relevant studies published between 1 January, 1990 and 29 October, 2020 were identified by searching MEDLINE®, Embase, CINAHL® and Cochrane Library, including reference and citation checking. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were used to assess the risk of bias of included studies according to study design.

Results

Eighteen publications reporting on 17 studies met inclusion criteria; 16 quantitative and two qualitative studies. All studies were conducted in the United States, except one study from the Netherlands. Failure to follow-up abnormal screening mammograms within 3 and at 6 months ranged from 7.2–33% and 27.3–71.6%, respectively. Women of ethnic minority and lower education attainment were more likely to have inadequate follow-up. Factors influencing follow-up included physician-patient miscommunication, information overload created by automated alerts, the absence of adequate retrieval systems to access patient’s results and a lack of coordination of patient records. Logistical barriers to follow-up included inconvenient clinic hours and inconsistent primary care providers. Patient navigation and case management with increased patient education and counselling by physicians was demonstrated to improve follow-up.

Conclusions

Follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care is suboptimal. However, interventions addressing amendable factors that negatively impact on follow-up have the potential to improve follow-up, especially for populations of women at risk of inadequate follow-up.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08100-3.

Healthcare delivery interventions to reduce cancer disparities worldwide

Globally, cancer care delivery is marked by inequalities, where some economic, demographic, and sociocultural groups have worse outcomes than others. In this review, we sought to identify patient-facing interventions designed to reduce disparities in cancer care in both high- and low-income countries. We found two broad categories of interventions that have been studied in the current literature: Patient navigation and telehealth. Navigation has the strongest evidence base for reducing disparities, primarily in cancer screening. Improved outcomes with navigation interventions have been seen in both high- and low-income countries. Telehealth interventions remain an active area of exploration, primarily in high income countries, with the best evidence being for the remote delivery of palliative care. Ongoing research is needed to identify the most efficacious, cost-effective, and scalable interventions to reduce barriers to the receipt of cancer care globally.

Establishing effective patient navigation programs in oncology

PURPOSE

Recent advances in cancer treatment have resulted in greatly improved survival, and yet many patients in the USA have not benefited due to poor access to healthcare and difficulty accessing timely care across the cancer care continuum. Recognizing these issues and the need to facilitate discussions on how to improve navigation services for patients with cancer, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) held a workshop entitled, "Establishing Effective Patient Navigation Programs in Oncology. The purpose of this manuscript is to disseminate the conclusions of this workshop while providing a clinically relevant review of patient navigation in oncology.

DESIGN

Narrative literature review and summary of workshop discussions RESULTS: Patient navigation has been shown to be effective at improving outcomes throughout the spectrum of cancer care. Work remains to develop consensus on scope of practice and evaluation criteria and to align payment incentives and policy.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation plays an essential role in overcoming patient- and system-level barriers to improve access to cancer care and outcomes for those most in need.

The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs across the cancer continuum: A systematic review

Published studies regarding patient navigation (PN) and cancer were reviewed to assess quality, determine gaps, and identify avenues for future research. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for studies investigating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of PN across the cancer continuum. Each included article was scored independently by 2 separate reviewers with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. The current review identified 113 published articles that assessed PN and cancer care, between August 1, 2010, and February 1, 2018, 14 of which reported on the cost-effectiveness of PN programs. Most publications focused on the effectiveness of PN in screening (50%) and diagnosis (27%) along the continuum of cancer care. Many described the effectiveness of PN for breast cancer (52%) or colorectal cancer outcomes (51%). Most studies reported favorable outcomes for PN programs, including increased uptake of and adherence to cancer screenings, timely diagnostic resolution and follow-up, higher completion rates for cancer therapy, and higher rates of attending medical appointments. Cost-effectiveness studies showed that PN programs yielded financial benefits. Quality assessment showed that 75 of the 113 included articles (65%) had 2 or more weak components. In conclusion, this review indicates numerous gaps within the PN and cancer literature where improvement is needed. For example, more research is needed at other points along the continuum of cancer care outside of screening and diagnosis. In addition, future research into the effectiveness of PN for understudied cancers outside of breast and colorectal cancer is necessary along with an assessment of cost-effectiveness and more rigorous reporting of study designs and results in published articles.

Adherence in the Cancer Care Setting: a Systematic Review of Patient Navigation to Traverse Barriers

Patient navigation is an evidence-based intervention involving trained healthcare workers who assist patients in assessing and mitigating personal and environmental factors to promote healthy behaviors. The purpose of this research is to systematically assess the efficacy of patient navigation and similar programs to improve diagnosis and treatment of diseases affecting medically underserved populations. A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and CINAHL to identify potential studies. Eligible studies were those containing original peer-reviewed research reports in English on patient navigation, community health workers, vulnerable and underserved populations, and healthcare disparity. Specific outcomes regarding patient navigator including the effect of the intervention on definitive diagnosis and effect on initiation of treatment were extracted from each study. The search produced 1428 articles, and 16 were included for review. All studies involved patient navigation in the field of oncology in underserved populations. Timing of initial contact with a patient navigator after diagnostic or screening testing is correlated to the effectiveness of the navigator intervention. The majority of the studies reported significantly shorter time intervals to diagnosis and to treatment with patient navigation. Patient navigation expedites oncologic diagnosis and treatment of patients in underserved populations. This intervention is more efficacious when utilized shortly after screening or diagnostic testing.

The Case for Patient Navigation in Lung Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Populations: A Systematic Review

Patient navigation has been proposed to combat cancer disparities in vulnerable populations. Vulnerable populations often have poorer cancer outcomes and lower levels of screening, adherence, and treatment. Navigation has been studied in various cancers, but few studies have assessed navigation in lung cancer. Additionally, there is a lack of consistency in metrics to assess the quality of navigation programs. The authors conducted a systematic review of published cancer screening studies to identify quality metrics used in navigation programs, as well as to recommend standardized metrics to define excellence in lung cancer navigation. The authors included 26 studies evaluating navigation metrics in breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer. After reviewing the literature, the authors propose the following navigation metrics for lung cancer screening programs: (1) screening rate, (2) compliance with follow-up, (3) time to treatment initiation, (4) patient satisfaction, (5) quality of life, (6) biopsy complications, and (7) cultural competency.

Utilization of Patient Navigators in an Urban Academic Pediatric Primary Care Practice

Navigating health care systems can be a challenge for families. A retrospective descriptive cohort analysis was conducted assessing referrals to patient navigators (PNs) in one urban academic pediatric primary care practice. PNs tracked referral processes and a subset of PN referrals was assessed for markers of successful referrals. The most common reasons for referral were assistance overcoming barriers to care (46%), developmental concerns (38%), and adherence/care coordination concerns (14%). Significant predictors of referral were younger age, medical complexity, public insurance, male sex, and higher rates of no-show to visits in primary or subspecialist care. The majority of referrals were resolved. The referrals for process-oriented needs were significantly more successful than those for other concerns. PNs were more effective for discrete process tasks than for those that required behavior change by patients or families. Future directions include analysis of cost effectiveness of the PN program and analysis of parent and primary care provider experience.

Effects of program scale-up on time to resolution for patients with abnormal screening mammography results

PURPOSE

Effects of geographic program expansion to rural areas on screening program outcomes are understudied. We sought to determine whether time-to-resolution (TTR) varied significantly by service delivery time period, location, and participant characteristics across 19 North Texas counties.

METHODS

We calculated proportions undergoing diagnostic follow-up and resolved ≤ 60 days. We calculated median TTR for each time period and abnormal result BI-RADS 0, 4, 5. Cox proportional hazards regressions estimated time period and patient characteristic effects on TTR. Wilcoxon rank sum tests evaluated whether TTR differed between women who did or did not transfer between counties for services.

RESULTS

TTR ranged from 14 to 17 days for BI-RADs 0, 4, and 5; 12.4% transferred to a different county, resulting in longer median TTR (26 vs. 16 days; p < .001). Of those completing follow-up, 92% were resolved ≤ 60 days (median 15 days). For BI-RAD 3, TTR was 208 days (including required 180 day waiting period). Follow-up was significantly lower for women with BI-RAD 3 (59% vs. 96%; p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Expansion maintained timely service delivery, increasing access to screening among rural, uninsured women. Policies adding a separate quality metric for BI-RAD 3 could encourage follow-up monitoring to address lower completion and longer TTR among women with this result.

Patient navigators for people with chronic disease: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

People with chronic diseases experience barriers to managing their diseases and accessing available health services. Patient navigator programs are increasingly being used to help people with chronic diseases navigate and access health services.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to summarize the evidence for patient navigator programs in people with a broad range of chronic diseases, compared to usual care.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Social Work Abstracts from inception to August 23, 2017. We also searched the reference lists of included articles. We included original reports of randomized controlled trials of patient navigator programs compared to usual care for adult and pediatric patients with any one of a defined set of chronic diseases.

RESULTS

From a total of 14,672 abstracts, 67 unique studies fit our inclusion criteria. Of these, 44 were in cancer, 8 in diabetes, 7 in HIV/AIDS, 4 in cardiovascular disease, 2 in chronic kidney disease, 1 in dementia and 1 in patients with more than one condition. Program characteristics varied considerably. Primary outcomes were most commonly process measures, and 45 of 67 studies reported a statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that patient navigator programs improve processes of care, although few studies assessed patient experience, clinical outcomes or costs. The inability to definitively outline successful components remains a key uncertainty in the use of patient navigator programs across chronic diseases. Given the increasing popularity of patient navigators, future studies should use a consistent definition for patient navigation and determine which elements of this intervention are most likely to lead to improved outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO #CRD42013005857.

Patient Navigation in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

CONTEXT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among cancers affecting both men and women in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) supports both direct clinical screening services (screening provision) and activities to promote screening at the population level (screening promotion).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to characterize patient navigation (PN) programs for screening provision and promotion for the first 1 to 2 years of program funding.

PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of the 29 CRCCP grantees (25 states and 4 tribal organizations) and 14 in-depth interviews to assess program implementation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The survey and interview guide collected information on CRC screening provision and promotion activities and PN, including the structure of the PN program, characteristics of the navigators, funding mechanism, and navigators' activities.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of 28 CRCCP grantees of the survey used PN for screening provision whereas 18 grantees used navigation for screening promotion. Navigators were often trained in nursing or public health. Navigation activities were similar for both screening provision and promotion, and common tasks included assessing and responding to patient barriers to screening, providing patient education, and scheduling appointments. For screening provision, activities centered on making reminder calls, educating patients on bowel preparation for colonoscopies, and tracking patients for completion of the tests. Navigation may influence screening quality by improving patients' bowel preparation for colonoscopies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides insights into PN across a federally funded CRC program. Results suggest that PN activities may be instrumental in recruiting people into cancer screening and ensuring completed screening and follow-up.

Time from Screening Mammography to Biopsy and from Biopsy to Breast Cancer Treatment among Black and White, Women Medicare Beneficiaries Not Participating in a Health Maintenance Organization

PURPOSE

There is a breast cancer mortality gap adversely affecting Black women in the United States. This study assessed the relationship between number of days between abnormal mammogram, biopsy, and treatment among Medicare (Part B) beneficiaries ages 65 to 74 and 75 to 84 years, accounting for race and comorbidity.

METHODS

A cohort of non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White women residing in the continental United States and receiving no services from a health maintenance organization was randomly selected from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services denominator file. The cohort was followed from 2005 to 2008 using Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services claims data. The sample included 4,476 women (weighted n = 70,731) with a diagnosis of breast cancer. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to identify predictors of waiting times.

FINDINGS

Black women had a mean of 16.7 more days between biopsy and treatment (p < .001) and 15.7 more days from mammogram to treatment (p = .003) than White women. Median duration from abnormal mammogram to treatment exceeded National Quality Measures for Breast Centers medians regardless of race, age, or number of comorbidities (overall 43 days vs. the National Quality Measures for Breast Centers value of 28 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Medical care delays may contribute, in part, to the widening breast cancer mortality gap between Black women and White women. Further study, with additional clinical and social information, is needed to broaden scientific understanding of racial determinants and assess the clinical significance of mammogram to treatment times among Medicare beneficiaries.

Effect of patient navigation on satisfaction with cancer-related care

PURPOSE

Despite growing popularity of patient navigation (PN) as a means to improve cancer care quality and reduce cancer-related disparities, there are few well-designed controlled trials assessing the impact of PN on patient outcomes like satisfaction with care. The present controlled study examined effect of PN on satisfaction with cancer-related care.

METHODS

Patients who presented with a symptom or abnormal screening test (n = 1788) or definitive diagnosis (n = 445) of breast, cervical, colorectal, or prostate cancer from eight Patient Navigator Research Program sites were included in one of two groups: intervention (PN) or comparison (usual care or usual care plus cancer educational materials). Trained patient navigators met with intervention group participants to help them assess and identify resources to address barriers to cancer diagnostic or treatment care. Using a validated instrument, we assessed participants' satisfaction with their cancer diagnostic or treatment care up to 3 months after diagnostic resolution of a cancer-related abnormality or within 3 months of initiation of cancer treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, patients reported high satisfaction with diagnostic care and cancer treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between PN and control groups in satisfaction with cancer-related care (p > 0.05). Hispanic and African American participants were less likely to report high satisfaction with cancer care when compared to White patients. Middle-aged participants with higher education, higher household income, private insurance, owning their own home, working full-time, and those whose primary language is English had higher satisfaction with cancer-related diagnostic care.

CONCLUSIONS

PN had no statistically significant effect on patients' satisfaction with cancer-related care. Further research is needed to define the patient populations who might benefit from PN, content of PN that is most useful, and services that might enhance PN.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT00613275 , NCT00496678 , NCT00375024 , NCT01569672.

Cancer Care Delivery and Women's Health: The Role of Patient Navigation

Background

Patient navigation (PN) is a patient-centered health-care service delivery model that assists individuals, particularly the medically underserved, in overcoming barriers (e.g., personal, logistical, and system) to care across the cancer care continuum. In 2012, the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) announced that health-care facilities seeking CoC-accreditation must have PN processes in place starting January 1, 2015. The CoC mandate, in light of the recent findings from centers within the Patient Navigation Research Program and the influx of PN interventions, warrants the present literature review.

Methods

PubMed and Medline were searched for studies published from January 2010 to October 2015, particularly those recent articles within the past 2 years, addressing PN for breast and gynecological cancers, and written in English. Search terms included patient navigation, navigation, navigator, cancer screening, clinical trials, cancer patient, cancer survivor, breast cancer, gynecological cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, vaginal cancer, and vulvar cancer.

Results

Consistent with prior reviews, PN was shown to be effective in helping women who receive cancer screenings, receive more timely diagnostic resolution after a breast and cervical cancer screening abnormality, initiate treatment sooner, receive proper treatment, and improve quality of life after cancer diagnosis. However, several limitations were observed. The majority of PN interventions focused on cancer screening and diagnostic resolution for breast cancer. As observed in prior reviews, methodological rigor (e.g., randomized controlled trial design) was lacking.

Conclusion

Future research opportunities include testing PN interventions in the post-treatment settings and among gynecological cancer patient populations, age-related barriers to effective PN, and collaborative efforts between community health workers and patient navigators as care goes across segments of the cancer control continuum. As PN programs continue to develop and become a standard of care, further research will be required to determine the effectiveness of cancer PN across the cancer care continuum, and in different patient populations.

Training in Patient Navigation: A Review of the Research Literature

Despite the proliferation of patient navigation programs designed to increase timely receipt of health care, little is known about the content and delivery of patient navigation training, or best practices in this arena. The current study begins to address these gaps in understanding, as it is the first study to comprehensively review descriptions of patient navigation training in the peer-reviewed research literature. Seventy-five patient navigation efficacy studies published since 1995, identified through PubMed and by the authors, were included in this narrative review. Fifty-nine of the included studies (79%) mentioned patient navigation training, and 55 of these studies additionally provided a description of training. Most studies did not thoroughly document patient navigation training practices. Additionally, several topics integral to the role of patient navigators, as well as components of training central to successful adult learning, were not commonly described in the research literature. Descriptions of training also varied widely across studies in terms of duration, location, format, learning strategies employed, occupation of trainer, and content. These findings demonstrate the need for established standards of navigator training as well as for future research on the optimal delivery and content of patient navigation training.

Mobilizing social support networks to improve cancer screening: the COACH randomized controlled trial study design

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations face many barriers to cancer care, including limited support in navigating through the complexities of the healthcare system. Family members play an integral role in caring for patients and provide valuable care coordination; however, the effect of family navigators on adherence to cancer screening has not previously been evaluated. Training and evaluating trusted family members and other support persons may improve cancer outcomes for vulnerable patients.

METHODS

Guided by principles of community based participatory research (CBPR), "Evaluating Coaches of Older Adults for Cancer Care and Healthy Behaviors (COACH)" is a community-based randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a trained participant-designated coach (support person or care giver) in navigating cancer-screening for older African American adults, 50-74 years old. Participants are randomly assigned as dyads (participant+coach pair) to receiving either printed educational materials only (PEM--control group) or educational materials plus coach training (COACH--intervention group). We defined a coach as family member, friend, or other lay support person designated by the older adult. The coach training is designed as a one-time, 35- to 40-minute training consisting of: 1) a didactic session that covers the role of the coach, basic facts about colorectal, breast and cervical cancers (including risk factors, signs and symptoms and screening modalities), engaging the healthcare provider in cancer screening, insurance coverage for screening, and related healthcare issues, 2) three video skits addressing misconceptions about and planning for cancer screening, and 3) an interactive role-play session with the trainer to reinforce and practice strategies for encouraging the participant to get screened. The primary study outcome is the difference in the proportion of participants completing at least one of the recommended screenings (for breast, cervix or colorectal cancer) between the control and intervention groups.

DISCUSSION

Building on trusted patient contacts to encourage cancer screening, COACH is a highly sustainable intervention in a high-risk population. It has the potential to minimize the effect of mistrust of the medical establishment on screening behaviors by mobilizing participants' existing support networks. If effective, the intervention could have a high impact on health care disparities research across multiple diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01613430 ). Registered June 5, 2012.

Impact of patient navigation in eliminating economic disparities in cancer care

BACKGROUND

Patient navigation may reduce cancer disparities associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and household factors. This study examined whether these factors were associated with delays in diagnostic resolution among patients with cancer screening abnormalities and whether patient navigation ameliorated these delays.

METHODS

This study analyzed data from 5 of 10 centers of the National Cancer Institute's Patient Navigation Research Program, which collected SES and household data on employment, income, education, housing, marital status, and household composition. The primary outcome was the time to diagnostic resolution after a cancer screening abnormality. Separate adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were fit for each SES and household factor, and an interaction between that factor and the intervention status was included.

RESULTS

Among the 3777 participants (1968 in the control arm and 1809 in the navigation intervention arm), 91% were women, and the mean age was 44 years; 43% were Hispanic, 28% were white, and 27% were African American. Within the control arm, the unemployed experienced a longer time to resolution than those employed full-time (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; P = .02). Renters (HR, 0.81; P = .02) and those with other (ie, unstable) housing (HR, 0.60; P < .001) had delays in comparison with homeowners. Never married (HR, 0.70; P < .001) and previously married participants (HR, 0.85; P = .03) had a longer time to care than married participants. There were no differences in the time to diagnostic resolution with any of these variables within the navigation intervention arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Delays in diagnostic resolution exist by employment, housing type, and marital status. Patient navigation eliminated these disparities in the study sample. These findings demonstrate the value of providing patient navigation to patients at high risk for delays in cancer care.

Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

Patient-physician communication is critical for helping patients understand and complete the complex steps needed to diagnose stage and treat lung cancer. We assessed which domains of patient-physician communication about lung cancer and its treatment are associated with receipt of disease-directed, stage-appropriate treatment.

METHODS

Patients with recently diagnosed lung cancer were recruited from four medical centers in New York City from 2008 to 2011. Participants were surveyed about discussions with physicians regarding treatment, symptoms, and needs. Multiple regression analysis and structural equation modeling were used to assess which communication factors were associated with disease treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 352 participants, 191 (54%) received disease-directed, stage-appropriate treatment. Unadjusted associations between communication items and treatment found that participants who felt that their physicians explained the risks and disadvantages of lung cancer treatment (p < 0.01), discussed their chances of cure (p = 0.02), discussed goals of treatment (p < 0.01), or who were warm and friendly (p = 0.04) were more likely to undergo treatment. Three communication domains were identified: treatment information, physician support, and patient symptoms/needs. After adjusting for known determinants of lung cancer treatment, increased treatment information was associated with higher probability of cancer-directed treatment (p = 0.003). Other communication domains (physician support or patient symptoms/needs) were not independent predictors of treatment (p > 0.05 for both comparisons).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that treatment information is particularly important for increasing the probability of cancer-directed therapy among lung cancer patients. Clinicians should ensure that they clearly discuss treatment goals and options with patients while maintaining empathy, supporting patient needs, and addressing symptoms.

Patient navigation to improve follow-up of abnormal mammograms among disadvantaged women

BACKGROUND

Patient navigation (PN) can improve breast cancer care among disadvantaged women. We evaluated the impact of a PN program on follow-up after an abnormal mammogram.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2010, disadvantaged women with an abnormal mammogram (Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] codes 0, 3, 4, 5) cared for in a community health center (CHC) with PN were compared to those receiving care in 11 network practices without PN. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to compare the percentages receiving appropriate follow-up and time to follow-up between the groups.

RESULTS

Abnormal mammography findings were reported for 132 women in the CHC with PN and 168 from practices without PN. The percentage of women with appropriate follow-up care was higher in the practice with PN than in non-PN practices (90.4% vs. 75.3%, adjusted p=0.006). RESULTS varied by BI-RADS score for women in PN and non-PN practices (BI-RADS 0, 93.7% vs. 90.2%, p=0.24; BI-RADS 3, 85.7% vs. 49.2%, p=0.003; BI-RADS 4/5, 95.1% vs. 82.8%, p=0.26). Time to follow-up was similar for BI-RADS 0 and occurred sooner for women in the PN practice than in non-PN practices for BI-RADS 3 and 4/5 (BI-RADS 3, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.41 [1.36-4.27], BI-RADS 4/5, aHR [95% CI]: 1.41 [0.88-2.24]).

CONCLUSIONS

Disadvantaged women from a CHC with PN were more likely to receive appropriate follow-up after an abnormal mammogram than were those from practices without PN. Expanding PN to include all disadvantaged women within primary care networks could improve equity in cancer care.

Effect of patient navigation on time to diagnostic resolution among patients with colorectal cancer-related abnormalities

The objective of this study is to evaluate whether a patient navigation (PN) program is effective in reducing delay in diagnostic resolution among medically underserved patients with colorectal cancer (CRC)-related abnormalities in Tampa Bay, Florida. This study involved ten primary care clinics randomized either to receive navigation or to serve as controls (five clinics per arm). Each clinic identified all subjects with CRC-related abnormalities in the year prior to the clinic beginning participation in the Moffitt Patient Navigator Research Program. Patients with CRC-related abnormalities were navigated from the time of a colorectal abnormality to diagnostic resolution. Control patients received usual care, and outcome information was obtained from medical record abstraction. Using a frailty Cox proportional hazard model, we examined the length of time between colorectal abnormality and definitive diagnosis. One hundred ninety-three patients were eligible for the study because of a CRC-related abnormality (75 navigated and 118 controls). Analysis of PN effect by two time periods of resolution (0-4 and >4 months) showed a lagged effect of PN. The adjusted time-varying PN effect on diagnostic resolution compared to the controls was marginally significant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.15, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.29) after controlling for insurance status. The predicted aHR at 4 months was 1.2, but showed no significant effect until 12 months. For patients having an abnormal symptom of CRC, PN appeared to have a positive effect over time and sped diagnostic resolution after 4 months. However, the small sample size limits drawing a definitive conclusion regarding the positive PN effect.