Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening Research Articles

Effectiveness of workplace cancer screening interventions: a systematic review

IntroductionCancer cases are rising globally, with a noticeable rise in younger adults. Screening and early detection are effective in decreasing mortality. Workplaces can play a role in promoting cancer screening uptake. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of workplace breast, lung, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening interventions, and the factors impacting their effectiveness.MethodologySix databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus) were searched, and cancer screening promotion and cancer screening uptake was analysed using effect direction plots. Magnitude of effectiveness (i.e., change in knowledge or screening rate) was also evaluated.ResultsIn total, 13,426 articles were identified. After screening and applying the eligibility criteria, 21 articles were included in the analysis. A positive effect direction was seen for all workplace cancer screening promotion interventions. Magnitude of effectiveness for cancer screening promotion interventions resulted in a > 30% change in knowledge or screening uptake in 4/7 of breast cancer, in 3/4 of cervical cancer and 1/3 colorectal cancer screening promotion interventions. For workplace cancer screening uptake interventions, a positive effect direction was observed for the majority (18/22). Cancer screening uptake interventions showed a > 30% change in magnitude of screening rate in 4/7 breast cancer, 5/10 colorectal cancer and in 1/5 cervical cancer workplace interventions. No studies for lung cancer were eligible. Factors positively influencing effectiveness included an interest in health and previous healthcare use, while fear of cancer and embarrassment of screening negatively influenced effectiveness.ConclusionWorkplace cancer screening promotion and uptake interventions can effectively improve cancer screening knowledge and increase uptake of screening tests.

Barriers to and facilitators of implementing colorectal cancer screening evidence-based interventions in federally qualified health centers: a qualitative study

BackgroundThere is an urgent need to increase colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) uptake in Texas federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), which serve a predominantly vulnerable population with high demands. Empirical support exists for evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that are proven to increase CRCS; however, as with screening, their use remains low in FQHCs. This study aimed to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).MethodsWe recruited employees involved in implementing CRCS EBIs (e.g., physicians) using data from a CDC-funded program to increase the CRCS in Texas FQHCs. Through 23 group interviews, we explored experiences with practice change, CRCS promotion and quality improvement initiatives, organizational readiness, the impact of COVID-19, and the use of CRCS EBIs (e.g., provider reminders). We used directed content analysis with CFIR constructs to identify the critical facilitators and barriers.ResultsThe analysis revealed six primary CFIR constructs that influence implementation: information technology infrastructure, innovation design, work infrastructure, performance measurement pressure, assessing needs, and available resources. Based on experiences with four recommended EBIs, participants described barriers, including data limitations of electronic health records and the design of reminder alerts targeted at deliverers and recipients of patient or provider reminders. Implementation facilitators include incentivized processes to increase provider assessment and feedback, existing clinic processes (e.g., screening referrals), and available resources to address patient needs (e.g., transportation). Staff buy-in emerged as an implementation facilitator, fostering a conducive environment for change within clinics.ConclusionsUsing CFIR, we identified barriers, such as the burden of technology infrastructure, and facilitators, such as staff buy-in. The results, which enhance our understanding of CRCS EBI implementation in FQHCs, provide insights into designing nuanced, practical implementation strategies to improve cancer control in a critical setting.

Facing the Emotional Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening. The Roles of Reappraisal and Situation Selection.

Disgust, embarrassment, and fear can hinder the attendance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, individuals can respond to these emotions differently. The present study tested whether reappraising a negative stimulus versus avoiding a negative stimulus is associated with age; whether these two emotion regulation strategies (reappraisal and situation selection) moderate the effects of disgust, embarrassment and fear on CRC screening intention; and the efficacy of a message based on participants' preferred emotion regulation strategy. We recruited 483 Italian participants (aged 40-84 years) through snowball sampling. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions differing for a message promoting CRC screening with an affective lever, a cognitive lever, both levers or none. Key variables included emotion regulation strategies, emotional barriers and intention to get screened. The preference for reappraisal over situation selection increased with age. Reappraisal neutralized the effect of disgust on CRC screening intention. The combined message with both affective and cognitive levers increased CRC screening intention (b = 0.27, β = 0.11, SE = 0.13 p = .049), whereas reading the message based only on the affective (b = 0.16, β = 0.06, SE = 0.14 p = .258) or the cognitive (b = 0.22, β = 0.09, SE = 0.14 p = .107) lever was not effective. Communication campaigns should support the activation of a reappraisal strategy of emotion control, and messages promoting CRC screening should highlight both the instrumental (i.e., early detection) and affective (i.e., peace of mind) benefits of attendance.

Methods for scaling up an outreach intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in rural areas

BackgroundMailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach and patient navigation are evidence-based practices shown to improve rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) and follow-up in various settings, yet these programs have not been broadly adopted by health systems and organizations that serve diverse populations. Reasons for low adoption rates are multifactorial, and little research explores approaches for scaling up a complex, multi-level CRC screening outreach intervention to advance equity in rural settings.MethodsSMARTER CRC, a National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot project, is a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed FIT and patient navigation program involving 3 Medicaid health plans and 28 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho followed by a national scale-up trial. The SMARTER CRC intervention combines mailed FIT outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal FIT result. We applied the framework from Perez and colleagues to identify the intervention’s components (including functions and forms) and scale-up dissemination strategies and worked with a national advisory board to support scale-up to additional organizations. The team is recruiting health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations in the USA that serve a rural population. To teach organizations about the intervention, activities include Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) tele-mentoring learning collaboratives, a facilitation guide and other materials, a patient navigation workshop, webinars, and individualized technical assistance. Our primary outcome is program adoption (by component), measured 6 months after participation in an ECHO learning collaborative. We also assess engagement and adaptations (implemented and desired) to learn how the multicomponent intervention might be modified to best support broad scale-up.DiscussionFindings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings.Trial registrationRegistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI’s Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP no.: NCI-2021–01032) on May 11, 2021.

"Sorry for laughing, but it's scary": humor and silence in discussions of Colorectal Cancer with Urban American Indians.

Given high rates of cancer mortality in Native communities, we examined how urban American Indian and Alaska Native elders talk about colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC screening. We conducted seven focus groups with a total of 46 participants in two urban clinics in the Pacific Northwest to assess participant awareness, perceptions, and concerns about CRC and CRC screening. Using speech codes theory, we identified norms that govern when and how to talk about CRC in this population. Our analyses revealed that male participants often avoided screening because they perceived it as emasculating, whereas women often avoided screening because of embarrassment and past trauma resulting from sexual abuse. Both men and women used humor to mitigate the threatening nature of discussions about CRC and CRC screening. We offer our analytic results to assist others in developing culturally appropriate interventions to promote CRC screening among American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Didactic and narrative persuasion: An experiment to promote colorectal cancer screening.

We tested whether a didactic and a narrative video (i.e. educational content and personal stories versus irrelevant information) could boost colorectal cancer (CRC) screening intention directly and through cognitive predictors of CRC screening behavior. We also tested whether exposure to a story changed participants' affective forecasting, reducing the perception of negative emotions associated with CRC screening (disgust, embarrassment, and fear). The study was conducted online with a between-participants design and recruiting a convenience sample (N = 375). We found that, compared with watching the control video, being exposed to the narrative video about CRC screening was indirectly associated with greater screening intention via vicarious experience and positive attitudes, whereas watching the didactic video was positively associated with CRC screening intention only among participants who had received an invitation letter but did not get screened, and among those yet to receive an invitation to screen. In the latter group, screening intention was boosted through positive attitudes. Our findings do not confirm that stories change affective forecasting, but narration likely fosters messages acceptance through vicarious experience. We also found support for the effectiveness of physicians' recommendations in promoting CRC screening, an intervention that might be effectively administered through a generalized, cost-effective video.

Use of a mixed-methods approach to develop a guidebook with messaging to encourage colorectal cancer screening among Black individuals 45 and older.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States and disproportionately impacts Black individuals. Here, we describe the mixed-methods approach used to develop a tailored message guidebook to promote CRC screening among Black individuals in the setting of recently updated screening guidelines. This mixed-methods study included 10 in-depth qualitative interviews and 490 surveys in a nationally representative sample of unscreened Black individuals age ≥ 45. Messages were developed based on American Cancer Society (ACS) and National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable (NCCRT) research findings, tested among Black individuals using MaxDiff analytic methods, and reviewed by a multi-sector expert advisory committee of NCCRT members. The most frequently reported screening barrier in all age groups was self-reported procrastination (40.0% in age 45-49, 42.8% for age 50-54, 34.2% for age ≥ 55). Reasons for procrastination varied by age and included financial concerns, COVID-19 concerns, and fear of the test and bowel preparation. Additional screening barriers included lack of symptoms, provider recommendation, and family history of CRC. Most individuals age 45-49 preferred to receive screening information from a healthcare provider (57.5%); however, only 20% reported that a provider had initiated a screening conversation. We identified age-specific barriers to CRC screening and tailored messaging to motivate participation among unscreened Black people age ≥ 45. Findings informed the development of the NCCRT and ACS guidebook for organizations and institutions aiming to increase CRC screening participation in Black individuals.

Using the Multi-Theory Model (MTM) of Health Behavior Change to Explain the Seeking of Stool-Based Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide and is the second leading cause of cancer-associated deaths. While colorectal cancer is on the decline in the United States (US), disparities still exist, despite the non-invasive screening modalities, such as stool-based tests have shown themselves to be effective in the detection of colorectal cancer. Many of the existing stool-based test interventions lack the use of a contemporary theory-based approach. Given the paucity of theory-based interventions intended to promote stool-based tests, this cross-sectional study utilizes the multi-theory model (MTM) of health behavior change to explain the seeking of stool-based tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. An online 57-item questionnaire with an established psychometric validity was used to collect responses from the US-based sample (n = 640) of adults aged 45-75 years old. The data were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate statistical methods. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was conducted to test the construct validity of the survey instrument. In this nationwide sample, 39.2% (n = 251) of participants reported having received some form of a stool-based test. Among the participants who did not undergo stool-based CRC screening, the MTM subscales, including "participatory dialogue", "behavioral confidence", and "changes in the social environment", were significant predictors of initiating screening behavior and explained 48% of the variance in the initiation among this group (R2 = 0.579, F = 5.916, p < 0.001; adjusted R2 = 0.481). The MTM may be a useful framework with which to design educational, mass media, social media, and clinical interventions for the promotion of stool-based CRC screening among adults aged 45-75 years old.

Implications of Public Interest in Colonoscopy: Analysis of Google Trends Data From 12 European Countries.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the deadliest diseases in the European Union. Colonoscopy remains the gold standard of CRC screening. Analysis of colonoscopy-related Google Trends (GT; Google LLC, Mountain View, California, United States) data could provide useful information regarding interest in colonoscopy and potential barriers making patients unwilling to attend screening programs. Data were collected using GT for the main search term "colonoscopy" and the two most related queries. Colonoscopy volumes were extracted from the Eurostat database. Due to limited Eurostat data availability, analysis was performed from January 2004 to December 2015 for each of the 12 included countries. Univariate linear regression analysis demonstrated statistically significant correlations between annual search volumes of "colonoscopy" and the annual number of colonoscopies performed in included countries (R2 = 0.923, P<.001). Trend analysis showed that the cumulative search volumes for "colonoscopy" gradually increased through the analyzed period. The spectrum of the most related queries encompassed "preparation for colonoscopy", "endoscopy", "after endoscopy", "colon", "colonoscopy diet", "virtual colonoscopy", "colonoscopy under anesthesia", "waiting times for colonoscopy" and "colonoscopy price". For eight out of nine queries, statistically significant correlations with procedure volumes were revealed. GT could be a useful tool in assessing public interest in colonoscopy. Potential barriers that prevent people from attending CRC screening programs were identified. The study demonstrated that the internet has become an important field for CRC screening promotion. GT utility for colonoscopy and CRC screening providers was highlighted. This was the first analysis of GT data in colonoscopy focused on European countries.

Developing a Social Marketing–Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Campaign Centered on Stool-Based Testing for Patients Utilizing Services at a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center

Background More than 50% of colorectal cancer (CRC)–related deaths could be prevented with early detection and treatment. Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHCs)—safety-net facilities that provide primary care services to uninsured, underinsured and minority patients—report some of the lowest CRC screening rates. Effective CRC screening interventions within FQHCs may help to promote CRC screening utilization among patients from diverse backgrounds. Focus of Article This study was designed to explore average-risk, patient perceptions of facilitators and impediments of using the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kit for CRC screening within the social marketing framework of the 4 “P’s”—product, price, place, and promotion. Research Aim To conduct formative research with priority populations (i.e., diverse, FQHC patients), assess acceptability of the FIT kit, and identify ways to better meet preferences and needs. Program Design/Approach Qualitative, Focus Groups. Importance to the Social Marketing Field Findings from this study would aid in the future development of a community-based prevention marketing intervention to promote CRC screening within FQHCs that serve diverse patient populations. Methods Focus groups were conducted in English and Spanish with CRC screening age-eligible patients from a South Florida FQHC System. Interview guides were designed to better understand FQHC patient perceptions of CRC Screening via the FIT kit (product) by up-to-date and not up-to-date participants. Additional topics included likes/dislikes (price), preferred location for completing CRC screening and receiving CRC prevention education (place), and strategies for persuasive communication to increase CRC screening among patients who visit FQHCs (promotion). Data were analyzed to identify FIT screening facilitators and impediments using thematic coding in MaxQDA. Results Five focus groups, involving 36 participants aged 50 and older, were conducted. Over half of participants self-identified as Hispanic (36%) or non-Hispanic Black (28%). Key facilitators were the convenience and simplicity of at-home testing (product), presumed affordability of it compared to colonoscopy (price), and ability to return by mail (place). Participants also shared numerous strategies for promotion, including direct referral from Primary Care Providers, mass media campaigns, mailed or electronic reminders from the clinic, and peer advocacy events in churches. Recommendations for Research or Practice Social marketing provides an adequate approach for developing a patient-centered campaign to promote CRC screening uptake at FQHCs. Future CRC screening promotional campaigns at FQHCs should build on the motivation that patients must prioritize their health by emphasizing the convenience of completing CRC screening at home with the capability of mailing it back. Clinics should also work to reduce patient responsibility by developing automated clinic system reminders to openly communicate with patients about CRC screening.

Barriers and Facilitators of Colonoscopy Screening Among Latino Men in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion Program.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among Latino men in the United States, yet they have low screening rates. This study explored barriers and facilitators of colonoscopy screening among Latino participants in a CRC screening promotion program. Six focus groups were conducted, in Spanish, with 45 Latino men, of which 28 had received and 17 had not received a colonoscopy. Analysis of the discussion transcripts identified barriers to CRC screening, facilitators to CRC screening, and recommendations for health information dissemination. There was consensus among all participants that they had not received adequate information on colonoscopy screening from their health care providers. Unscreened participants wanted more details about the colonoscopy procedure and bowel preparation. Screened men were more knowledgeable than unscreened men about CRC, the colonoscopy procedure, and the benefits of early detection. Participants also expressed their fears, concerns, and perceptions of stigma in relation to colonoscopy screening. They described family and personal testimonials as facilitators to engaging in colorectal cancer screening. Findings underscore the need for ongoing research and educational efforts to address personal and cultural stigma surrounding colonoscopy and CRC, particularly in underserved communities. Study findings also highlight the danger of missing out on opportunities to increase CRC screening when colonoscopy is the primary screening option offered. Additional research is needed to ensure trust in the health care system and to examine the effectiveness of testimonials on CRC screening among Latino men.

Abstract A102: Developing faith-based messaging and materials for colorectal cancer screening: Application of boot camp translation within the African Methodist Episcopal Church

Abstract Introductory sentences: We use boot camp translation (BCT), a validated community based participatory strategy, to elicit input from African Methodist Episcopal (AME) congregants, leadership, and healthcare systems in Atlanta, Georgia to create culturally appropriate and locally relevant colorectal cancer (CRC) faith-based screening messages and materials for AME church communities. Brief description of pertinent experimental procedures: In the United States, CRC is the third-leading cause of cancer death and disproportionately impacts African Americans, highlighting the need for timely screening within this community. African American adults have higher annual rates of new CRC cases and are diagnosed with CRC at younger ages when compared to White adults. Regular CRC screening is pertinent to increasing the chance of early diagnosis and survival, however, African Americans are less likely to get screened for CRC than Whites. Church-based educational programs have been successful in promoting cancer screening, including CRC screening, in various racial and ethnic groups. Churches can serve as key partners in delivering health information as they are among the most trusted institutions within the African American community. As part of a collaboration among the American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, AME churches and Atlanta-based healthcare systems, we will apply BCT to develop and disseminate messaging to promote CRC screening within the AME community. The BCT session aims are twofold: 1) to identify the role of the church in bringing CRC information to the AME community and 2) to define the content and format of effective faith-based CRC messages tailored for the AME community. Summary of new, unpublished data: The BCT workshops will occur in July 2022.Statement of conclusions: We anticipate preliminary findings and materials to be ready by September 2022. Citation Format: Priyanka Gautom, Jamie H. Thompson, Cheryl A. Johnson, Jennifer S. Rivelli, Gloria D. Coronado. Developing faith-based messaging and materials for colorectal cancer screening: Application of boot camp translation within the African Methodist Episcopal Church [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):Abstract nr A102.

Self-Reported Reasons for Inconsistent Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening Using FIT in Flanders, Belgium

Background: In Flanders, the uptake in the population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program (using fecal immunochemical test, FIT) is suboptimal (~50%). This study explored the reasons for inconsistent participation in FIT screening among irregular participants in Flanders. Methods: An online survey with both open questions and fixed statements was sent to irregular participants (2016–2018) in the Flemish CRC screening program. A reminder email followed eight weeks after the first email. Data analysis used both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Post-stratification weights based on gender, age group, and the first two digits of the postcode were employed to reduce non-response bias. Results: In total, 5328 out of 19,592 irregular participants responded to the survey. While the main reasons not to participate were related to ‘postponing participation’ and ‘having other priorities’, the main reasons to participate were related to the importance of (preventive) health checks. The role of general practitioners (GPs) in promoting CRC screening also emerged as an important theme among the respondents’ answers (based on fixed statements). Conclusions: The study reported the main reasons for inconsistent participation in FIT screening for CRC in Flanders. The findings are helpful in guiding tailored interventions to increase FIT screening uptake in the region.

Abstract A001: The development of a multilevel risk prediction model to identify risk of failure to complete CRC screening

Abstract Context: The use of predictive analytics can help health systems target the right services to the right patients at the right time while improving population health. Multilevel data, or data at the interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy levels, is rarely sought after but may be used to improve risk prediction by providing information about a patient and the many groups to which they belong. Colorectal cancer screening promotion can be expensive and not all patients need it. Objective: This study sought to develop a risk prediction model using individual data available in the EHR, and then compared a multilevel risk prediction model using publicly available multilevel data. Study design and analysis: Retrospective data was used to develop a risk model, using logistic regression, first in data available in the EHR, and then adding multilevel data. Setting or dataset: This retrospective data only study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northwest. Population studied: Patients were eligible who were 50-75 years old, had been members at KPNW for at least a year before their birthday in 2018, and if they were due for screening. Results: The individual level model was sufficient and included 14 characteristics, and had a bootstrap corrected C-statistic of 0.722. The multilevel model added 9 variables, and the bootstrap corrected C-statistic was 0.724. Conclusions: Models can be used to identify patients unlikely to screen, although the performance of the model after adding multilevel data did not improve. Screening models could help in population health management of CRC screening. Citation Format: Amanda F. Petrik. The development of a multilevel risk prediction model to identify risk of failure to complete CRC screening [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Colorectal Cancer; 2022 Oct 1-4; Portland, OR. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(23 Suppl_1):Abstract nr A001.

How effective are digital technology-based interventions at promoting colorectal cancer screening uptake in average-risk populations? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Despite the global prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) and efforts in screening advocacy, screening uptake remains relatively low. Considering the greater accessibility and popularity of telemedicine in behaviour change interventions, this meta-analysis seeks to examine the usefulness of digital interventions in promoting CRC screening uptake as compared to existing non-digital strategies. A systematic search on five databases identified articles published before September 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of digital interventions to usual care were included and assessed using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Effectiveness of interventions was measured by CRC screening completion rates, and pooled effect sizes were computed for both digital intervention subtypes identified – decision-making aids and tailored educational interventions. 14 studies (17,075 participants) assessed to have low or some risk of bias were included in this meta-analysis. A random-effects model revealed that digital interventions were more likely to promote CRC screening uptake (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11–1.56), and using a decision-making aid was almost 1.5 times more likely to result in screening completion (i.e., completed a colorectal investigation using stool-based or direct visualization test) (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.24–1.63). Meanwhile, the tailored educational intervention subtype failed to achieve statistical significance in promoting screening uptake, bearing in mind the significant heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 88.6%). Digital decision-making aids significantly improved CRC screening uptake compared to tailored digital educational interventions and usual care. However, as all included studies were conducted in Western settings, its role in augmenting existing CRC screening promotion strategies especially among Asians should be further evaluated.

Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery. This study aimed to understand how CDC-funded Colorectal Cancer Control Program recipients and their partner health systems and clinics may have modified evidence-based intervention (EBI) implementation to promote CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic; to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing modifications; and to extract lessons that can be applied to support CRC screening, chronic disease management, and clinic resilience in the face of future public health crises. Nine recipients were selected to reflect the diversity inherent among all CRCCP recipients. Recipient and clinic partner staff answered unique sets of pre-interview questions to inform tailoring of interview guides that were developed using constructs from the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study team then interviewed recipient, health system, and clinic partner staff incorporating pre-interview responses to focus each conversation. We employed a rapid qualitative analysis approach then conducted virtual focus groups with recipient representatives to validate emergent themes. Three modifications that emerged from thematic analysis include: (1) offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits for CRC screening with mail or drop off return; (2) increasing the use of patient education and engagement strategies; and (3) increasing the use of or improving automated patient messaging systems. With improved tracking and automated reminder systems, mailed FIT kits paired with tailored patient education and clear instructions for completing the test could help primary care clinics catch up on the backlog of missed screenings during COVID-19. Future research can assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering mailed FIT kits on maintaining or improving CRC screening, especially among people who are medically underserved.

Factors that support readiness to implement integrated evidence-based practice to increase cancer screening

BackgroundIn 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP), which partners with health care systems and primary care clinics to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. We interviewed CRCCP stakeholders to explore the factors that support readiness for integrated implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities to promote CRC screening with other screening and chronic disease management activities in primary care clinics.MethodsUsing the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted a literature review and identified constructs to guide data collection and analysis. We purposively selected four CRCCP awardees that demonstrated ongoing engagement with clinic partner sites, willingness to collaborate with CDC and other stakeholders, and availability of high-quality data. We gathered background information on the selected program sites and conducted primary data collection interviews with program site staff and partners. We used NVivo QSR 11.0 to systematically pilot-code interview data, achieving a kappa coefficient of 0.8 or higher, then implemented a step-wise process to identify site-specific and cross-cutting emergent themes. We also included screening outcome data in our analysis to examine the impact of integrated cancer screening efforts on screening uptake.ResultsWe identified four overarching factors that contribute to clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities: the funding environment, clinic governance structure, information sharing within clinics, and clinic leadership support. Sites reported supporting clinic partners’ readiness for integrated implementation by providing coordinated funding application processes and braided funding streams and by funding partner organizations to provide technical assistance to support efficient incorporation of EBIs and supporting activities into existing clinic workflows. These actions, in turn, support clinic readiness to integrate the implementation of EBIs and supporting activities that promote CRC screening along with other screening and chronic disease management activities.DiscussionThe selected CRCCP program sites supported clinics’ readiness to integrate CRC EBIs and supporting activities with other screening and chronic disease management activities increasing uptake of CRC screening and improving coordination of patient care.ConclusionsWe identified the factors that support clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities including flexible funding mechanisms, effective data sharing systems, coordination across clinical staff, and supportive leadership. The findings provide insights into how public health programs and their clinic partners can collectively support integrated implementation to promote efficient, coordinated patient-centered care.

Qualitative Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Nebraska.

Compared to urban residents, rural populations are less likely to engage in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. As part of a statewide cancer needs assessment, we aimed to elicit rural perspectives about CRC screening and resources. We conducted three focus groups with rural Nebraska cancer survivors and caregivers (N = 20) in Spring 2021 using a collective case study design. Participant awareness of and knowledge about CRC screening methods varied across focus groups; overall, 95% of participants had heard of colonoscopy. Participants were less familiar with fecal tests and had confusion about them. Colonoscopy was associated with negative perceptions regarding the time, cost, and discomfort of the preparation and procedure, but some providers did not discuss alternative methods unless the patient resisted colonoscopy. Healthcare providers played a key role educating rural communities about CRC screening recommendations (age, risk) and testing options and being persistent in those recommendations. CRC awareness campaigns should include a variety of communication channels (TV, radio, billboards, health fairs, churches, healthcare settings). Promotion of CRC screening should include education about screening age guidelines, alternative test types, and informed decision-making between provider and patient regarding preferred screening methods based on the pros and cons of each test type. Individuals with a family history of colon issues (Crohn’s disease, CRC) are considered high risk and need to be aware that screening should be discussed at earlier ages.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13187-022-02170-y.

Mailed fecal testing and patient navigation versus usual care to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up colonoscopy in rural Medicaid enrollees: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

BackgroundScreening reduces incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC), yet US screening rates are low, particularly among Medicaid enrollees in rural communities. We describe a two-phase project, SMARTER CRC, designed to achieve the National Cancer Institute Cancer MoonshotSM objectives by reducing the burden of CRC on the US population. Specifically, SMARTER CRC aims to test the implementation, effectiveness, and maintenance of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program to improve rates of CRC screening, follow-up colonoscopy, and referral to care in clinics serving rural Medicaid enrollees.MethodsPhase I activities in SMARTER CRC include a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program involving three Medicaid health plans and 30 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho; the implementation of the program is supported by training and practice facilitation. Participating clinic units were randomized 1:1 into the intervention or usual care. The intervention combines (1) mailed fecal testing outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and (2) patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal fecal test result. We will evaluate the effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance of the intervention and track adaptations to the intervention and to implementation strategies, using quantitative and qualitative methods. Our primary effectiveness outcome is receipt of any CRC screening within 6 months of enrollee identification. Our primary implementation outcome is health plan- and clinic-level rates of program delivery, by component (mailed FIT and patient navigation). Trial results will inform phase II activities to scale up the program through partnerships with health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations that serve rural primary care clinics; scale-up will include webinars, train-the-trainer workshops, and collaborative learning activities.DiscussionThis study will test the implementation, effectiveness, and scale-up of a multi-component mailed fecal testing and patient navigation program to improve CRC screening rates in rural Medicaid enrollees. Our findings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings.Trial registrationRegistered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI’s Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP #: NCI-2021-01032) on May 11, 2021.

Feasibility of implementing project Buhay: the first colorectal cancer screening promotion programme for Filipinos in Alaska

ABSTRACT This study assessed the feasibility of implementing Project Buhay (PB), the first colorectal cancer (CRC) screening promotion programme for Filipinos in Alaska and developed through university-community partnership. PB involved piloting two interventions: a group health education intervention and (GHEI) a video-based intervention (VBI) showing a mini-documentary of a Filipina from Alaska with CRC. Participants included self-identified Filipinos, aged 50 to 75 years who were not current in CRC screening. Data collected include recruitment, reach, implementation process, short-term outcomes, and implementation barriers. Results show that PB reached a total of three Alaskan communities and exposed almost 50 participants. GHEI and VBI participants were followed-up at three-month post-intervention, with 80% reporting their intention to get CRC screening within a year. The main barrier in implementing PB was its lack of funding and time, which lessened effectiveness and reduced community and participant reach. However, PB team's ability to make adjustments in implementation and leverage existing university and community assets led to the successful implementation of theinterventions. At the project’s conclusion, there were positive implications for both the Filipino community in Alaska and project team, affirming the importance of university-community partnership.