1
|
Grant SJ, Yanguela J, Odebunmi O, Grimshaw AA, Giri S, Wheeler SB. Systematic Review of Interventions Addressing Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Care and Health Outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:1563-1574. [PMID: 38382005 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2023] [Revised: 10/19/2023] [Accepted: 11/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/23/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Cancer health disparities result from complex interactions among socioeconomic, behavioral, and biological factors, disproportionately affecting marginalized racial and ethnic groups. The objective of this review is to synthesize existing evidence on interventions addressing racial or ethnic disparities in cancer-related health care access and clinical outcomes. METHODS A comprehensive search of Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection was conducted from database inception to February 23, 2023. Controlled vocabulary and keywords helped to identify studies on cancer-related disparities and interventions in adults age 18 years or older. Two reviewers followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. RESULTS Of 7,526 screened studies, 34 met the inclusion criteria involving 24,134 participants. Most studies focused on breast cancer (n = 17) and Hispanic/Latino populations (n = 10) and enrolled participants primarily from community-based sites (n = 19). Twenty-one studies examined patient-centered outcomes, such as health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, while 15 studies assessed process-of-care outcomes, such as timeliness of care. Most studies followed a community-based participatory research framework. Five patient-centered outcome studies reported a positive intervention effect, often combining cancer education with psychological well-being interventions. Among the 15 process-of-care outcome studies, nine reported positive effects, with the majority (n = 8) being navigation-based interventions. CONCLUSION This systematic review emphasizes the vital role of community partnerships in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in oncology care and highlights the need for standardized approaches in intervention research because of the heterogeneity of studied interventions. Furthermore, the prevailing emphasis on breast cancer and Hispanic populations indicates the need for future investigations into other priority demographic groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shakira J Grant
- Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Juan Yanguela
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Olufeyisayo Odebunmi
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Alyssa A Grimshaw
- Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library, Yale University, New Haven, CT
| | - Smith Giri
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes & Survivorship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Stephanie B Wheeler
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ferrari RM, Atkins DL, Wangen M, Rohweder CL, Waters AR, Correa S, Richmond J, van Rensburg D, Ittes A, Odebunmi O, Issaka RB, Ceballos R, Shah PD, Wheeler SB, Brenner AT. Patient perspectives on a proposed pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program. Transl Behav Med 2023; 13:909-918. [PMID: 37756664 PMCID: PMC10724111 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibad057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common and preventable cancer. CRC screening is underutilized, particularly within medically underserved communities. Most interventions aimed at increasing CRC screening are delivered through primary care clinics. Pharmacies are more accessible than traditional primary care settings and may be ideally suited for delivering CRC screening and increasing access. Fecal immunochemical test is an at-home, stool-based CRC screening test that could be distributed through pharmacies. The purpose of our study was to assess patient perspectives on receiving fecal immunochemical test-based CRC screening through pharmacies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants residing in North Carolina and Washington. Interviews explored acceptability and intervention design preferences for a pharmacy-based CRC screening program. The interview guide was informed by Andersen's Healthcare Utilization Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Interviews were conducted at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Patients perceived a pharmacy-based CRC screening program to be highly acceptable, citing factors such as ease of pharmacy access and avoiding co-pays for an office visit. Some concerns about privacy and coordination with patients' primary care provider tempered acceptability. Trust and positive relationships with providers and pharmacists as well as seamless care across the CRC screening continuum also were viewed as important. Patients viewed pharmacy-based CRC screening as an acceptable option for CRC screening. To improve programmatic success, it will be important to ensure privacy, determine how communication between the pharmacy and the patient's provider will take place, and establish closed-loop care, particularly for patients with abnormal results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Renée M Ferrari
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, Maternal and Child Health Department, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Dana L Atkins
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Mary Wangen
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Catherine L Rohweder
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Austin R Waters
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, Health Policy and Management Department, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Sara Correa
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Jennifer Richmond
- Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Dillon van Rensburg
- Office of Community Outreach and Engagement, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Annika Ittes
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Olufeyisayo Odebunmi
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, Health Policy and Management Department, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Rachel B Issaka
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Rachel Ceballos
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Parth D Shah
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Stephanie B Wheeler
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, Health Policy and Management Department, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Alison T Brenner
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, The University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brenner AT, Waters AR, Wangen M, Rohweder C, Odebunmi O, Marciniak MW, Ferrari RM, Wheeler SB, Shah PD. Patient preferences for the design of a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program. Cancer Causes Control 2023; 34:99-112. [PMID: 37072526 PMCID: PMC10113122 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-023-01687-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2022] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 04/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess preferences for design of a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program (PharmFIT™) among screening-eligible adults in the United States (US) and explore the impact of rurality on pharmacy use patterns (e.g., pharmacy type, prescription pick-up preference, service quality rating). METHODS We conducted a national online survey of non-institutionalized US adults through panels managed by Qualtrics, a survey research company. A total of 1,045 adults (response rate 62%) completed the survey between March and April 2021. Sampling quotas matched respondents to the 2010 US Census and oversampled rural residents. We assessed pharmacy use patterns by rurality and design preferences for learning about PharmFIT™; receiving a FIT kit from a pharmacy; and completing and returning the FIT kit. RESULTS Pharmacy use patterns varied, with some notable differences across rurality. Rural respondents used local, independently owned pharmacies more than non-rural respondents (20.4%, 6.3%, p < 0.001) and rated pharmacy service quality higher than non-rural respondents. Non-rural respondents preferred digital communication to learn about PharmFIT™ (36% vs 47%; p < 0.001) as well as digital FIT counseling (41% vs 49%; p = 0.02) more frequently than rural participants. Preferences for receiving and returning FITs were associated with pharmacy use patterns: respondents who pick up prescriptions in-person preferred to get their FIT (OR 7.7; 5.3-11.2) and return it in-person at the pharmacy (OR 1.7; 1.1-2.4). CONCLUSION Pharmacies are highly accessible and could be useful for expanding access to CRC screening services. Local context and pharmacy use patterns should be considered in the design and implementation of PharmFIT™.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison T Brenner
- Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| | - Austin R Waters
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Mary Wangen
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Catherine Rohweder
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Olufeyisayo Odebunmi
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Macary Weck Marciniak
- Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Renée M Ferrari
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Stephanie B Wheeler
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Parth D Shah
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|