Third Annual Fecal Occult Blood Testing in Community Health Clinics

Components and effectiveness of patient navigation programmes to increase participation to breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Inequalities in cancer incidence and mortality can be partly explained by unequal access to high-quality health services, including cancer screening. Several interventions have been described to increase access to cancer screening, among them patient navigation (PN), a barrier-focused intervention. This systematic review aimed to identify the reported components of PN and to assess the effectiveness of PN to promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

We searched Embase, PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection databases. The components of PN programmes were identified, including the types of barriers addressed by navigators. The percentage change in screening participation was calculated.

RESULTS

The 44 studies included were mainly on colorectal cancer and were conducted in the USA. All described their goals and community characteristics, and the majority reported the setting (97.7%), monitoring and evaluation (97.7%), navigator background and qualifications (81.4%) and training (79.1%). Supervision was only referred to in 16 studies (36.4%). Programmes addressed mainly barriers at the educational (63.6%) and health system level (61.4%), while only 25.0% reported providing social and emotional support. PN increased cancer screening participation when compared with usual care (0.4% to 250.6% higher) and educational interventions (3.3% to 3558.0% higher).

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation programmes are effective at increasing participation to breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. A standardized reporting of the components of PN programmes would allow their replication and a better measure of their impact. Understanding the local context and needs is essential to design a successful PN programme.

Telehealth Use for Enhancing the Health of Rural Older Adults: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Telehealth holds potential for inclusive and cost-saving health care; however, a better understanding of the use and acceptance of telehealth for health promotion among rural older adults is needed. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence for telehealth use among rural-living older adults and to explore cost-effectiveness for health systems and patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Study designs reporting health promotion telehealth interventions with rural-living adults aged 55 and older were eligible for review. Following screening and inclusion, articles were quality-rated and ranked by level of evidence. Data extraction was guided by the Technology Acceptance Model and organized into outcomes related to ease of use, usefulness, intention to use, and usage behavior along with cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of 2,247 articles screened, 42 were included. Positive findings for the usefulness of telehealth for promoting rural older adults' health were reported in 37 studies. Evidence for ease of use and usage behavior was mixed. Five studies examined intention to continue to use telehealth and in 4 of these, patients preferred telehealth. Telehealth was cost-effective for health care delivery (as a process) compared to face to face. However, findings were mixed for cost-effectiveness with both reports of savings (e.g., reduced travel) and increased costs (e.g., insurance).

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Telehealth was useful for promoting health among rural-living older adults. Technological supports are needed to improve telehealth ease of use and adherence. Cost-effectiveness of telehealth needs more study, particularly targeting older adults.

Building Cancer Prevention and Control Research Capacity in Rural Appalachian Kentucky Primary Care Clinics During COVID-19: Development and Adaptation of a Multilevel Colorectal Cancer Screening Project

This study describes the development of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening multilevel intervention with four primary care clinics in rural Appalachian Kentucky. We also discuss barriers experienced by the clinics during COVID-19 and how clinic limitations and needs informed project modifications. Four primary care clinics were recruited, key informant interviews with clinic providers were conducted, electronic health record (EHR) capacity to collect data related to CRC screening and follow-up was assessed, and a series of meetings were held with clinic champions to discuss implementation of strategies to impact clinic CRC screening rates. Analysis of interviews revealed multilevel barriers to CRC screening. Patient-level barriers included fatalism, competing priorities, and financial and literacy concerns. The main provider- and clinic-level barriers were provider preference for colonoscopy over stool-based testing and EHR tracking concerns. Clinics selected strategies to address barriers, but the onset of COVID-19 necessitated modifications to these strategies. Due to COVID-19, changes in clinic staffing and workflow occurred, including provider furloughs, a state-mandated pause in elective procedures, and an increase in telehealth. Clinics adapted screening strategies to match changing needs, including shifting from paper to digital educational tools and using telehealth to increase annual wellness visits for screening promotion. While significant delays persist for scheduling colonoscopies, clinics were encouraged to promote stool-based tests as a primary screening modality for average-risk patients.

Engaging the Community on Colorectal Cancer Screening Education: Focus Group Discussions Among African Americans

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer in the USA, and African Americans experience disproportionate CRC diagnosis and mortality. Early detection could reduce CRC incidence and mortality, and reduce CRC health disparities, which may be due in part to lower screening adherence and later stage diagnosis among African Americans compared to whites. Culturally tailored interventions to increase access to and uptake of CRC stool-based tests are one effective strategy to increase benefits of screening among African Americans. The objectives of this study were to obtain feedback from African Americans on CRC educational materials being developed for a subsequent behavioral clinical trial and explore participants' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about CRC and CRC screening. Seven focus groups were conducted between February and November 2020. Participants were African Americans recruited through community contacts. Four focus groups were held in-person and three were conducted virtually due to Covid-19 restrictions. Participants ranked CRC educational text messages and provided feedback on a culturally tailored educational brochure. A focus group guide with scripted probes was used to elicit discussion and transcripts were analyzed using traditional content analysis. Forty-two African Americans participated. Four themes were identified from focus group discussions: (1) knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs on CRC and CRC screening; (2) reliable sources of cancer education information; (3) cultural factors affecting perspectives on health; and (4) community insights into cancer education. Participant input on the brochure was incorporated in content creation. Engaging African American community members to qualitatively examine cancer prevention has value in improving implementation strategy and planning for behavioral clinical trials.

Design of a randomized controlled trial to assess the comparative effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve three-year adherence to colorectal cancer screening among patients cared for in rural community health centers

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to decrease CRC mortality, yet significant disparities persist among those living in rural areas, from minority backgrounds, and those having low income. The purpose of this two-arm randomized controlled trial is to test the effectiveness and fidelity of a stepped care (increasing intensity as needed) approach to promoting 3-year adherence to CRC screening via fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy in rural community clinics serving high rates of low-income and minority patients. We hypothesize that, compared to enhanced usual care (EUC), patients receiving the multifaceted CRC screening intervention will demonstrate higher rates of CRC screening completion over 3 years. Participants from six federally qualified health centers (FQHCs; N = 1200 patients) serving predominately low-income populations in rural Louisiana will be randomized to the intervention or EUC arm. All participants will receive health literacy-directed CRC counseling, simplified materials about both the FIT and colonoscopy procedures, and motivational interviewing to aid in the determination of test preference. Participants in the intervention arm will also receive motivational reminder messages from their primary care provider (via audio recording or tailored text) for either a scheduled colonoscopy or return of a completed FIT. Participants in the EUC arm will receive the standard follow-up provided by their clinic or colonoscopy facility. The primary outcome will be completion of either colonoscopy or annual FIT over 3 years. Results will provide evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention to decrease disparities in CRC screening completion related to health literacy, race, and gender. Trial registration:Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT04313114.

Assessment of Oral Chemotherapy Nonadherence in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients Using Brief Measures in Community Cancer Clinics: A Pilot Study

The purpose of this pilot study was to assess Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) patients’ adherence to, beliefs about, and barriers to oral anticancer agents (OAC) using brief self-report measures in community-based cancer clinics. Patients completed a structured interview including a health literacy assessment, a Brief Medication Questionnaire, two single-item self-report adherence questions, and the Medications Adherence Reasons Scale. Of the 86 participants, 88.4% were white; 55.8% male; mean age, 58.7 years; and 22.1% had limited health literacy. Nonadherence (missing at least one dose in the last week) was reported by 18.6% of participants and associated (p < 0.003) with less-than-excellent perceived ability to take CML medications (16.3%). Black participants reported more difficulty taking CML medications than white participants (28.6% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.053). Among all participants, 43.0% reported their CML medicine was ineffective and 24.4% that taking CML pills was somewhat to very hard. The most common reasons for missing a dose were simply missed it (24.4%) and side effects (18.6%). Most patients perceived their ability to take CML medication was good to excellent, yet nearly one in five reported missing at least one dose in the last week. Brief, no-cost self-report assessments to screen CML patients’ OAC adherence, barriers, and beliefs could facilitate counseling in busy community cancer clinics.

Systematic Review of Interventions to Increase Stool Blood Colorectal Cancer Screening in African Americans

African Americans experience colorectal cancer (CRC) related disparities compared to other racial groups in the United States. African Americans are frequently diagnosed with CRC at a later stage, screening is underutilized, and mortality rates are highest in this group. This systematic review focused on intervention studies using stool blood CRC screening among African Americans in primary care and community settings. Given wide accessibility, low cost, and ease of dissemination of stool-based CRC screening tests, this review aims to determine effective interventions to improve participation rates. This systematic review included intervention studies published between January 1, 2000 and March 16, 2019. After reviewing an initial search of 650 studies, 11 studies were eventually included in this review. The included studies were studies conducted in community and clinical settings, using both inreach and outreach strategies to increase CRC screening. For each study, an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for the CRC screening intervention compared to the control arm was calculated based on the data in each study to report effectiveness. The eleven studies together recruited a total of 3334 participants. The five studies using two-arm experimental designs ranged in effectiveness with ORs ranging from 1.1 to 13.0 using interventions such as mailed reminders, patient navigation, and tailored educational materials. Effective strategies to increase stool blood testing included mailed stool blood tests augmented by patient navigation, tailored educational materials, and follow-up calls or mailings to increase trust in the patient-provider relationship. More studies are needed on stool blood testing interventions to determine effectiveness in this population.

Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review

Approximately one-third of adults in the United States (U.S.) have limited health literacy. Those with limited health literacy often have difficultly navigating the health care environment, including navigating care across the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment). Evidence-based interventions to assist adults with limited health literacy improve health outcomes; however, little is known about health literacy interventions in the context of cancer and their impact on cancer-specific health outcomes. The purpose of this review was to identify and characterize the literature on health literacy interventions across the cancer care continuum. Specifically, our aim was to review the strength of evidence, outcomes assessed, and intervention modalities within the existing literature reporting health literacy interventions in cancer. Our search yielded 1036 records (prevention/screening n = 174; diagnosis/treatment n = 862). Following deduplication and review for inclusion criteria, we analyzed 87 records of intervention studies reporting health literacy outcomes, including 45 pilot studies (prevention/screening n = 24; diagnosis/treatment n = 21) and 42 randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental trials (prevention/screening n = 31; diagnosis/treatment n = 11). This literature included 36 unique interventions (prevention/screening n = 28; diagnosis/treatment n = 8), mostly in the formative stages of intervention development, with few assessments of evidence-based interventions. These gaps in the literature necessitate further research in the development and implementation of evidence-based health literacy interventions to improve cancer outcomes.

The nurse practitioner as a bridge to interprofessional research team collaboration in rural community clinics

ABSTRACT

Clinical health outcomes and health disparities can be improved through interprofessional collaborations among multidisciplinary clinicians, health care services researchers, and patients. Bridging gaps between community clinics and urban academic centers allows added valuable perspectives that can lead to improved care and extend clinical research. Nurse practitioners (NPs) who serve as primary care providers in many rural community clinics can facilitate access to clinical trials for patients who are rarely included in health care services research as well as coordinate interprofessional research team collaboration. A NP working in a rural clinic can assist academic-based research teams in designing feasible strategies to address disparities and improve health care of underserved populations. The purpose of this article was to provide an example of a rural provider/urban academic research team collaborating to conduct a health literacy-directed randomized controlled trial to improve colorectal cancer screening in isolated rural community clinics.

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).

Follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening in rural community clinics: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Significant disparities exist in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates among those of low socioeconomic status, with fewer years of education, lacking health insurance, or living in rural areas.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the effectiveness of 2 follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to improve CRC screening: automated telephone call or personal call. Patients aged 50 to 75 years residing in 4 rural community clinics in Louisiana were given a structured interview that assessed demographic, health literacy and CRC screening barriers, knowledge, and attitudes. All were given health literacy-informed CRC education, a patient-friendly CRC screening pamphlet, simplified fecal immunochemical test (FIT) instructions, and a FIT kit, and a "teach-back" method was used to confirm understanding. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 telephone follow-up arms. If they did not mail their FIT kit within 4 weeks, they received a reminder call and were called again at 8 weeks if the test still was not received.

RESULTS

A total of 620 patients were enrolled. Approximately 55% were female, 66% were African American, and 40% had limited literacy. The overall FIT completion rate was 68%: 69.2% in the automated telephone call arm and 67% in the personal call arm. Greater than one-half of the patients (range, 58%-60%) returned the FIT kit without receiving a telephone call. There was no difference noted with regard to the effectiveness of the follow-up calls; each increased the return rate by 9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing FIT kits and literacy-appropriate education at regularly scheduled clinic visits with a follow-up telephone call when needed was found to increase CRC screening among low-income, rural patients. The lower cost automated call was just as effective as the personal call.

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.

Barriers and Facilitators to Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Rural Women in Community Clinics by Heath Literacy

BACKGROUND

Rural women lag rural men and urban women in colon cancer (CRC) screening completion.

OBJECTIVE

To identify rural female patients' knowledge, beliefs barriers, self-efficacy, prior recommendation and completion of CRC screening using an FOBT and to compare these factors by health literacy (HL) level.

METHODS

This descriptive study was conducted between 2015 and 2016 in 4 rural community clinics in south Louisiana. Patients overdue for screening were given a structured interview by a research assistant.

RESULTS

339 women were enrolled, mean age 58.5, 32% had limited HL, 66% were African American. Most (91.7%) had heard of CRC, yet only 71% knew of any CRC screening tests. Women with adequate HL had greater knowledge of specific tests than those with limited HL (78.4% vs 56.6%, p<0.001). Only 25.7% had been given information on CRC testing; those with adequate HL were more likely to have received information (30.1% vs 16.8%; p=0.017). Most women (93.2%) indicated they would want to know if they had CRC, while 72.2% reported a provider had recommended CRC screening. Only 24.9% said a healthcare provider had ever given them an FOBT or that they had ever completed an FOBT (22.7%). There were no differences in women's report of recommendation or completion by HL level.Self-efficacy for completing an FOBT was high; over 90% indicated they could get an FOBT, complete it and mail results to the lab. Level of confidence did not vary by literacy. Three of the four barrier items varied by HL with women with low HL being more likely to fear doing an FOBT because they thought FOBT instructions would be confusing (p=0.002), doing the test would be embarrassing (p=0.025) or messy (p=0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

Rural women are receptive to CRC screening and view FOBTs as effective. Rural community clinics need to provide low cost FOBTs with literacy, gender and culturally appropriate information.

Changes in Colorectal Cancer Screening Knowledge, Behavior, Beliefs, Self-Efficacy, and Barriers among Community Health Clinic Patients after a Health Literacy Intervention

OBJECTIVE

The objective in this pre- and post-survey assessment was to compare the effectiveness of a health literacy-directed intervention designed to increase knowledge, beliefs, barriers, self-efficacy and behavior associated with CRC screening with FOBT among patients cared for in predominantly rural community clinics and the change in these characteristics over the first 15 months after enrolling in a study designed to assess screening strategies.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2011, a quasi-experimental intervention was conducted in 8 predominantly rural Federally Qualified Health Centers. Patients were orally administered a 15-minute survey at enrollment by a clinic research assistant (RA) and at 15 months by phone by a central RA. Participants included 428 community clinic patients aged 50-85 (mean 58.5); the majority (79%) were female, 69% were African American, and 54% had limited health literacy.

RESULTS

There was significant improvement across all groups with the number of patients reporting they had been given information /education on CRC testing (p<.0001), been given an FOBT kit (p<.0001), and completed an FOBT (p<.0001) with significant improvement in having a doctor recommendation in all groups except usual care. Confidence in an FOBT's potential to decrease chances of dying from CRC improved across all groups as well (p<0.002). In addition, patients 'belief that they would get CRC in their lifetime' decreased across all groups post-intervention (p<0.03) as did their worry that they may find out they have CRC (p<0.04).

CONCLUSION

Overall these low income FQHC patients who were not up-to-date with screening had heard of CRC screening, had positive attitudes toward screening and wanted to know if they had cancer. Results demonstrate the value of giving patients a recommendation and a kit; patients in all groups reported significant increases at 15 months in completing CRC screening (>83%) as confirmed by study records.