Integrated approaches to delivering cancer screenings to address disparities: lessons learned from the evaluation of CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program

Background

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention launched the Colorectal Cancer Control Program to increase colorectal cancer screening among groups with low screening uptake. This engagement has enabled the health systems participating in the program to enhance infrastructure, systems, and process to implement interventions for colorectal cancer screening. These improvements have enabled other health promotion innovations such as the delivery of integrated interventions and supporting activities (referred to as integrated approaches) for multiple cancers. Using implementation science frameworks, the program evaluation team has examined these integrated approaches to capture the experiences of the awardees, health systems, and clinics.

Methods and results

The findings from this comprehensive evaluation are presented in a series of 3 manuscripts. The first manuscript provides a conceptual framework for integrated approaches for cancer screening to support comprehensive evaluations and offers recommendations for future research. The second manuscript presents findings on key factors that support readiness for implementing integrated approaches based on qualitative interviews guided by implementation science constructs. The final manuscript reports on the challenges and benefits of integrated approaches to increase cancer screening in primary care facilities based on lessons learned from three real-world implementation case studies.

Conclusion

Integrated models for implementing cancer screening could offer cost-effective approaches to reduce healthcare disparities. Additional implementation science-based systematic evaluations are needed to ensure integrated approaches are optimized, and cost-efficient models are scaled up.

Integrated interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of multiple cancer screenings: conceptual framework, determinants of implementation success, measurement challenges, and research priorities

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer has been shown to reduce mortality; however, not all men and women are screened in the USA. Further, there are disparities in screening uptake by people from racial and ethnic minority groups, people with low income, people who lack health insurance, and those who lack access to care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funds two programs-the Colorectal Cancer Control Program and the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program-to help increase cancer screenings among groups that have been economically and socially marginalized. The goal of this manuscript is to describe how programs and their partners integrate evidence-based interventions (e.g., patient reminders) and supporting activities (e.g., practice facilitation to optimize electronic medical records) across colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas based on implementation science.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory assessment using qualitative and quantitative data to describe implementation of integrated interventions and supporting activities for cancer screening. We conducted 10 site visits and follow-up telephone interviews with health systems and their partners to inform the integration processes. We developed a conceptual model to describe the integration processes and reviewed screening recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force to illustrate challenges in integration. To identify factors important in program implementation, we asked program implementers to rank domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Health systems integrated interventions for all screenings across single and multiple levels. Although potentially efficient, there were challenges due to differing eligibility of screenings by age, gender, frequency, and location of services. Program implementers ranked complexity, cost, implementation climate, and engagement of appropriate staff in implementation among the most important factors to success.

CONCLUSION

Integrating interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of cancer screenings could be an effective and efficient approach, but we currently do not have the evidence to recommend widescale adoption. Detailed multilevel measures related to process, screening, and implementation outcomes, and cost are required to evaluate integrated programs. Systematic studies can help to ascertain the benefits of integrating interventions and supporting activities for multiple cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas that might address current gaps in the literature.

The mechanisms of effect of a physiotherapist-delivered integrated psychological and exercise intervention for acute whiplash-associated disorders: secondary mediation analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Stress mediated the effect of a physiotherapist-delivered integrated intervention on multiple health outcomes and pain-related coping mediated the effect on pain self-efficacy only. Changes in depressive and posttraumatic stress symptoms were also mechanisms of effect.

Introduction:

Integrated psychological and physical treatments can improve recovery for whiplash-associated disorders (WADs). Little is known about how these interventions work.

Objective:

To examine the mechanisms by which a physiotherapist-delivered integrated intervention for acute WAD improves health outcomes.

Methods:

Secondary analysis using structural equation modelling of a randomized controlled trial comparing integrated stress inoculation training and exercise to exercise alone for acute WAD. Outcomes were disability, pain self-efficacy, pain intensity, and health-related quality of life at 12 months. The intended intervention target and primary mediator, stress was tested in parallel with pain-related coping, an additional cognitive behavioral mediator that significantly improved at posttreatment (Model 1). Stress-related constructs that commonly co-occur with stress and pain were also tested as parallel mediators: depression and pain-related coping (Model 2); and posttraumatic stress and pain-related coping (Model 3).

Results:

Reductions in stress mediated the effect of the integrated intervention on disability (β = −0.12, confidence interval [CI] = −0.21 to −0.06), pain self-efficacy (β = 0.09, CI = 0.02–0.18), pain (β = −0.12, CI = −0.21 to −0.06), and health-related quality of life (β = 0.11, CI = 0.04–0.21). There was an additional path to pain self-efficacy through pain-related coping (β = 0.06, CI = 0.01–0.12). Similar patterns were found in Models 2 and 3.

Conclusions:

Improvements in stress and related constructs of depression and posttraumatic stress, and pain-related coping were causal mechanisms of effect in a physiotherapist-delivered integrated intervention. As integrated interventions are growing in popularity, it is important to further personalize interventions for improved benefit.

A mixed methods feasibility study of the Kusamala Program at a nutritional rehabilitation unit in Malawi

BACKGROUND

Children admitted to nutritional rehabilitation units (NRUs) for inpatient treatment of severe acute malnutrition (SAM) are at high risk of poor developmental and nutritional outcomes. The Kusamala Program is an interactive hospital-based counseling program for primary caregivers of children with SAM that integrates three modules: nutrition and feeding; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH); and psychosocial stimulation. This mixed methods feasibility study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the Kusamala Program in an NRU setting and developmental outcomes in children with SAM 6 months after inpatient treatment.

METHODS

An internal pilot trial including the first 30 children and their primary caregivers enrolled to a cluster-randomized controlled trial of the Kusamala Program was performed. Barriers and enablers were identified in a qualitative study with a focus group discussion (FGD) and in-depth interviews (IDIs) with 12 hospital staff members, including five NRU nurses who deliver the Kusamala Program.

RESULTS

Results demonstrated high participant engagement (100%) and adherence (87%) of primary caregivers to the Kusamala Program. Potential barriers to implementation identified through the qualitative study were caregivers' perceived value of the program, prioritization of other ward activities, and shortages of staff. On the other hand, enablers to implementation were engaging other staff members, motivation and work ethic, and refresher training.

CONCLUSIONS

This mixed methods study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing the Kusamala Program in a real NRU setting. The full cluster-randomized controlled trial will be completed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Kusamala Program.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03072433. Registered on 7 March 2017-retrospectively registered.