Urban Safety-net Primary Care Research Articles

EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF INTERDISCIPLINARY EDUCATION AND TELEHEALTH PRIMARY CARE: QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY

Abstract In a provider shortage area, an Interprofessional Education and Telehealth Primary Care (IPETC) for geriatrics workforce was developed in 2020. To analyze the impact of IPETC on quality and efficiency of care, we measured quality outcomes defined by the CMS defined quality measures - dementia caregiver education/referral and advance care plan, and efficiency outcomes by estimating healthcare cost savings from reducing hospitalization. Two-hundred forty-four community-dwelling adults aged 60 to 97 with mild to moderate dementia were selected in an urban safety-net primary care clinic. Propensity - demographics and comorbidity was matched. Main outcomes were (A) number of hospitalization and 90-day rehospitalization rate, hospitalization-related healthcare cost estimates from the State Inpatient Dataset using the ICD-10 codes of principal diagnosis and hospital length of stay between January-December 2021. One-hundred twenty-two patients were cared by primary care providers who received the IPETC;122 patients were by those who did not have the IPETC; (2) CMS quality measures were compared between 2019 (baseline) and 2021 of patients cared by providers with IPETC. Number of hospitalization with IPETC was fewer than those without IPETC (0.72 vs. 1.38, p < .01). Number of 90-day rehospitalization with IPETC was fewer than those without IPETC (0.14 vs. 0.30, p < .01). An average cost-saving of $20,289 per patient was observed among those with IPETC than those without IPETC (p < .001). CMS quality measures improved from 15.6% to 51.0% in dementia caregiver education/referral; 10.2% to 24.7% in documented advance care plans.

EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF INTERDISCIPLINARY EDUCATION AND TELEHEALTH PRIMARY CARE: QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY

Abstract In a provider shortage area, an Interprofessional Education and Telehealth Primary Care (IPETC) for geriatrics workforce was developed in 2020. To analyze the impact of IPETC on quality and efficiency of care, we measured quality outcomes defined by the CMS defined quality measures - dementia caregiver education/referral and advance care plan, and efficiency outcomes by estimating healthcare cost savings from reducing hospitalization. Fifty eight community-dwelling adults aged 67 to 94 with mild to moderate dementia were selected in an urban safety-net primary care clinic. Propensity - demographics and level of physical impairment was matched. Main outcomes were (A) hospitalization-related healthcare cost estimates from the State Inpatient Dataset using the ICD-10 codes of principal diagnosis and hospital length of stay between January-December 2021. Twenty nine patients were cared by primary care providers who received the IPETC;29 patients were by those who did not have the IPETC; (2) CMS quality measures were compared between 2019 (baseline) and 2021. An average cost-saving of $22,135 per patient was observed among those treated by the healthcare providers who received the IPE/telehealth curriculum training than those treated by the providers without the training. CMS quality measures improved from 15.6% to 51.0% in dementia caregiver education/referral; 10.8% to 42.8% in documented advance care plans. Innovative interdisciplinary education and telehealth primary care has shown improvement of quality and efficiency of dementia care in a provider shortage area.

Accounting for the interplay of interpersonal and structural trauma in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, opioid use disorder, and mental health in urban safety-net primary care clinics

While the epidemiological literature recognizes associations between chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP), opioid use disorder (OUD), and interpersonal trauma stemming from physical, emotional, sexual abuse or neglect, the complex etiologies and interplay between interpersonal and structural traumas in CNCP populations are under-examined. Research has documented the relationship between experiencing multiple adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and the likelihood of developing an OUD as an adult. However, the ACEs framework is criticized for failing to name the social and structural contexts that shape ACE vulnerabilities in families. Social scientific theory and ethnographic methods offer useful approaches to explore how interpersonally- and structurally-produced traumas inform the experiences of co-occurring CNCP, substance use, and mental health. We report findings from a qualitative and ethnographic longitudinal cohort study of patients with CNCP (n = 48) who received care in safety-net settings and their primary care providers (n = 23). We conducted semi-structured interviews and clinical and home-based participant observation from 2018 to 2020. Here we focus our analyses on how patients and providers explained and situated the role of patient trauma in the larger clinical context of reductions in opioid prescribing to highlight the political landscape of the United States opioid overdose crisis and its impact on clinical interactions. Findings reveal the disproportionate burden structurally-produced, racialized trauma places on CNCP, substance use and mental health symptoms that shapes patients’ embodied experiences of pain and substance use, as well as their emotional experiences with their providers. Experiences of trauma impacted clinical care trajectories, yet providers and patients expressed limited options for redress. We argue for an adaptation of trauma-informed care approaches that contextualize the structural determinants of trauma and their interplay with interpersonal experiences to improve clinical care outcomes.

Telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain and opioid use disorder in safety net primary care

BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic increased use of telehealth for the management of opioid use disorder and chronic non-cancer pain in primary care safety net clinical systems. Significant barriers to telehealth exist, little is known about how these barriers impact urban safety net, primary care providers and their patients. The objective of this study was to qualitatively assess the benefits and challenges of telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain, opioid use disorder, and multi-morbidity in primary care, safety net clinical systems.MethodsWe interviewed patients with chronic non-cancer pain and history of substance use (n = 22) and their primary care clinicians (n = 7) in the San Francisco Bay Area, March-July 2020. We recorded, transcribed, coded, and content analyzed interviews.ResultsCOVID-19 shelter-in-place orders contributed to increases in substance use and uncontrolled pain, and posed challenges for monitoring opioid safety and misuse through telehealth. None of the clinics used video visits due to low digital literacy/access. Benefits of telehealth included decreased patient burden and missed appointments and increased convenience and control of some chronic conditions (e.g., diabetes, hypertension). Telehealth challenges included loss of contact, greater miscommunication, and less comprehensive care interactions.ConclusionsThis study is one of the first to examine telehealth use in urban safety net primary care patients with co-occurring chronic non-cancer pain and substance use. Decisions to continue or expand telehealth should consider patient burden, communication and technology challenges, pain control, opioid misuse, and medical complexity.

Hearing Loss Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment for Refugees and Asylees in an Urban Clinic, 2014-2017.

First, to determine whether using a single-question subjective hearing screen vs gold standard audiometric evaluation is effective for hearing loss screening in refugees and asylees. Second, to understand the clinical pathways for hearing loss diagnosis and treatment. This is a case series with chart review from January 2014 to December 2017. A large urban safety net primary care clinic in San Francisco, California. Patients were included who had a medical record and completed single-question subjective hearing screening and audiometric evaluation during refugee health examinations. An overall 349 patients met all inclusion criteria. Out of 349 patients, 48% were male; the median age was 29.3 years (SD, 15.1). The majority came from Central or South America (n = 148, 42%) and China (n = 79, 23%). Among all patients, 10 (3%) failed the subjective hearing screen, and 18 (5%) failed audiometric evaluation. Of those who failed the subjective hearing screen, 4 (40%) passed audiometric evaluation. Of those who failed the audiometric evaluation, 12 (66%) passed subjective screening, and only 5 (28%) received a diagnostic audiogram, with 4 diagnosed with hearing loss and 1 receiving hearing aids. The sensitivity of the subjective screening question was 33% and the specificity 99% as compared with audiometric evaluation. Audiometric evaluation is relatively inexpensive and easily administered, while a single subjective question is a poor screening tool. Hearing loss is undertreated in this population. Ensuring appropriate hearing loss screening, diagnosis, and treatment in this population is paramount to improving quality of life.

A Toolbox Approach to Obesity Treatment in Urban Safety-Net Primary Care Clinics: a Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

There is a need for new strategies to improve the success of obesity treatment within the primary care setting. To determine if patients offered low out-of-pocket cost weight management tools achieved more weight loss compared to usual care. Twelve-month pragmatic clinical weight loss trial with a registry-based comparator group performed in primary care clinics of an urban safety-net hospital. From a large clinical registry, we randomly selected 428 patients to have the opportunity to receive the intervention. Medical weight management tools-partial meal replacements, recreation center vouchers, pharmacotherapy, commercial weight loss program vouchers, and a group behavioral weight loss program-for $5 or $10 monthly. Patients chose their tools, could switch tools, and could add a second tool at 6months. The primary outcome was the proportion of intervention-eligible patients who achieved ≥ 5% weight loss. The main secondary outcome was the proportion of on-treatment patients who achieved ≥ 5% weight loss. Overall, 71.3% (305 of 428) had available weight measurement data/PCP visit data to observe the primary outcome. At 12months, 23.3% (71 of 305) of intervention-eligible participants and 15.7% (415 of 2640) of registry-based comparators had achieved 5% weight loss (p < 0.001). Of the on-treatment participants, 34.5% (39 of 113) achieved 5% weight loss. Mean percentage weight loss was - 3.15% ± 6.41% for on-treatment participants and - 0.30% ± 6.10% for comparators (p < 0.001). The initially preferred tools were meal replacements, pharmacotherapy, and recreation center passes. Access to a variety of low out-of-pocket cost weight management tools within primary care resulted in ≥ 5% body weight loss in approximately one quarter of low-income patients with obesity. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01922934.

Improving Provider Experience and Increasing Patient Access Through Nurse Practitioner-Physician Primary Care Teams.

Team-based care may address burnout in primary care; few studies have examined the impact of nurse practitioner-physician (NP-MD) teams on provider burnout. This article describes a model of NP-MD care teams in an urban safety-net primary care practice. Average time to third next available appointment with a team provider (either NP or MD) decreased by nearly 20 days after implementation of the model. In total, 79% of MDs reported that the model was very or extremely helpful in reducing the burden of work between visits and 100% of NPs reported that they were very or extremely satisfied with their current job.

Tapering off and returning to buprenorphine maintenance in a primary care Office Based Addiction Treatment (OBAT) program

BackgroundGuidelines recommend long-term treatment for opioid use disorder including the use of buprenorphine; however, many patients desire to eventually taper off. This study examines the prevalence and patient characteristics of patients that voluntarily taper off buprenorphine. MethodsThis is a 12-year retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine in a large urban safety-net primary care practice. The primary outcome was completion of a voluntary buprenorphine taper, which was further characterized as a medically supervised or unsupervised taper. The secondary outcome was re-engagement in care after taper. Descriptive statistics and estimated proportions of both taper completion and re-engagement in treatment were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. ResultsThe study sample included 1308 patients with a median follow-up time of 316 days; 48 patients were observed to taper off buprenorphine during the study period, with an estimated proportion of 15% (95%CI: 10%–21%) based on Kaplan Meier analyses. Less than half of the tapers, 45.8% (22/48), were medically supervised. Thirteen of the 48 patients subsequently, re-engaged in buprenorphine treatment (estimated proportion 61%, 95%CI: 27%–96%), based on Kaplan-Meier analyses with median follow-up time of 490 days. DiscussionDespite the fact that many patients desire to discontinue buprenorphine, a minority had a documented taper. Among those who tapered, more than half did so unsupervised by the clinic and a majority of those who tapered off returned to buprenorphine treatment within two years. As many patients are unable to successfully taper off buprenorphine, the medical community must work to address any barriers to long-term maintenance.

Introducing Primary Care Telephone Visits: An Urban Safety-Net Community Clinic Experience.

Background: Telephone consultation is widely used in primary care and can provide an effective and efficient alternative for the in-person visit. Gouverneur Health, a safety-net primary care practice in New York City serving a predominately immigrant population, evaluated the feasibility and physician and patient acceptability of a telephone visit initiative in 2015. Measures: Patient and physician surveys, and physician focus groups. Results: Though only 85 of 270 scheduled telephone visits (31%) were completed, 84% of patients reported being highly satisfied with their telephone visit. Half of physicians opted to participate in the pilot. Among participating physicians, all reported they were able to communicate adequately and safely care for patients over the telephone. Conclusions: Participating patients and physicians in a linguistically and culturally diverse urban safety-net primary care clinic were highly satisfied with the use of telephone visits, though completion of the visits was low. Lessons learned from this implementation can be used to expand access and provision of high-quality primary care to other vulnerable populations.

Physical symptoms screening for cardiopulmonary complications of obesity using audio computer-assisted self-interviews.

The main study objective was to assess the predictive value of selected physical symptoms for screening obstructive sleep apnea and major cardiac conditions in adults with obesity, thus providing the evidence for routine symptom screening of obesity complications endorsed by obesity management clinical practice guidelines. We performed a retrospective cohort study using patient-reported outcomes data including the physical symptoms severity component of the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale administered through Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviews combined with data from the electronic medical records of an urban safety-net primary care clinic. Non-underweight ambulatory patients completing the standardized survey assessment were included. The prevalence of pre-selected symptoms and the diagnostic characteristics at various severity cut-points were determined for obstructive sleep apnea or major cardiac conditions separately for patients with and without obesity. Of the 1399 patients included in this analysis, most (77%) were non-hispanic black or hispanic. Step-wise increases in positive likelihood ratios ranging between 1.2 and 4.6 with greater severity cough, dyspnea, fatigue, bloating, dizziness, and nausea were observed for both obstructive sleep apnea and major cardiac complications. Likelihood ratio estimates for both obese and non-obese patients were statistically significant. Our findings provide a basis to support current guideline recommendations for routine symptom screening to identify medical complications among patients with BMI 30kg/m2 or greater.

Long-term retention in Office Based Opioid Treatment with buprenorphine

BackgroundGuidelines recommend long-term treatment for opioid use disorder with buprenorphine; however, little is known about patients in long-term treatment. The aim of this study is to examine the prevalence and patient characteristics of long-term treatment retention (≥1year) in an Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) program with buprenorphine. MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine from January 2002 to February 2014 in a large urban safety-net primary care OBOT program. The primary outcome was retention in OBOT for at least one continuous year. Potential predictors included age, race, psychiatric diagnoses, hepatitis C, employment, prior buprenorphine, ever heroin use, current cocaine, benzodiazepine and alcohol use on enrollment. Factors associated with ≥1year OBOT retention were identified using generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. Patients who re-enrolled in the program contributed repeated observations. ResultsThere were 1605 OBOT treatment periods among 1237 patients in this study. Almost half, 45% (717/1605), of all treatment periods were ≥1year and a majority, 53.7% (664/1237), of patients had at least one ≥1year period. In adjusted analyses, female gender (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.55, 95% CI [1.20, 2.00]) psychiatric diagnosis (AOR 1.75 [1.35, 2.27]) and age (AOR 1.19 per 10year increase [1.05, 1.34]) were associated with greater odds of ≥1year retention. Unemployment (AOR 0.72 [0.56, 0.92]), Hepatitis C (AOR 0.59 [0.45, 0.76]), black race/ethnicity (AOR 0.53 [0.36, 0.78]) and Hispanic race/ethnicity (AOR 0.66 [0.48, 0.92]) were associated with lower odds of ≥1year retention. ConclusionsOver half of patients who presented to Office Based Opioid Treatment with buprenorphine were ultimately successfully retained for ≥1year. However, significant disparities in one-year treatment retention were observed, including poorer retention for patients who were younger, black, Hispanic, unemployed, or with hepatitis C.

Accuracy of the Audio Computer Assisted Self Interview version of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ACASI ASSIST) for identifying unhealthy substance use and substance use disorders in primary care patients

BackgroundAn Audio Computer-assisted Self Interview (ACASI) version of the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) could reduce barriers to substance use screening and assessment in primary care settings. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of an ACASI ASSIST for identification of unhealthy substance use and substance use disorders (SUD). Methods399 adult patients were consecutively recruited from an urban safety-net primary care clinic. ACASI ASSIST scores for tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine were compared against reference standard measures to assess the instrument’s diagnostic accuracy for identifying unhealthy use and SUD, first using empirically-derived optimal cutoffs, and second using the currently recommended ASSIST cutoffs. ResultsFor identifying any unhealthy use, at the empirically-derived cutoffs the ACASI ASSIST had 93.6% sensitivity and 85.8% specificity (AUC=0.90) for tobacco, 85.9% sensitivity and 60.3% specificity (AUC=0.73), for alcohol in men, 100% sensitivity and 62.4% specificity (AUC=0.81) for alcohol in women, 94.6% sensitivity and 81.6% specificity (AUC=0.88) for marijuana, and 86.1% sensitivity, 84.0% specificity (AUC=0.85) for cocaine. For SUD, sensitivity ranged from 79% (for alcohol in males), to 100% (for tobacco), and specificity was 83% or higher (AUCs ranged 0.83–0.91). For substances other than tobacco, empirically-derived cutoff scores were lower than the standard cutoffs, and resulted in higher sensitivity and lower specificity for identifying unhealthy substance use. ConclusionsThe ACASI ASSIST is a valid measure of unhealthy use and SUD for substances that are commonly used by primary care patients, and could facilitate effective and efficient screening for substance use in medical settings.

Validation of Self-Administered Single-Item Screening Questions (SISQs) for Unhealthy Alcohol and Drug Use in Primary Care Patients.

Very brief single-item screening questions (SISQs) for alcohol and other drug use can facilitate screening in health care settings, but are not widely used. Self-administered versions of the SISQs could ease barriers to their implementation. We sought to validate SISQs for self-administration in primary care patients. Participants completed SISQs for alcohol and drugs (illicit and prescription misuse) on touchscreen tablet computers. Self-reported reference standard measures of unhealthy use, and more specifically of risky consumption, problem use, and substance use disorders, were then administered by an interviewer, and saliva drug tests were collected. Adult patients aged 21-65 years were consecutively enrolled from two urban safety-net primary care clinics. The SISQs were compared against reference standards to determine sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for alcohol and drug use. Among the 459 participants, 22 % reported unhealthy alcohol use and 25 % reported drug use in the past year. The SISQ-alcohol had sensitivity of 73.3 % (95 % CI 65.3-80.3) and specificity of 84.7 % (95 % CI 80.2-88.5), AUC = 0.79 (95 % CI 0.75-0.83), for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and sensitivity of 86.7 % (95 % CI 75.4-94.1) and specificity of 74.2 % (95 % CI 69.6-78.4), AUC = 0.80 (95 % CI 0.76-0.85), for alcohol use disorder. The SISQ-drug had sensitivity of 71.3 % (95 % CI 62.4-79.1) and specificity of 94.3 % (95 % CI 91.3-96.6), AUC = 0.83 (95 % CI 0.79-0.87), for detecting unhealthy drug use, and sensitivity of 85.1 (95 % CI 75.0-92.3) and specificity of 88.6 % (95 % CI 85.0-91.6), AUC = 0.87 (95 % CI 0.83-0.91), for drug use disorder. The self-administered SISQs are a valid approach to detecting unhealthy alcohol and other drug use in primary care patients. Although self-administered SISQs may be less accurate than the previously validated interviewer-administered versions, they are potentially easier to implement and more likely to retain their fidelity in real-world practice settings.

A Brief Patient Self-administered Substance Use Screening Tool for Primary Care: Two-site Validation Study of the Substance Use Brief Screen (SUBS)

BackgroundSubstance use screening is widely encouraged in health care settings, but the lack of a screening approach that fits easily into clinical workflows has restricted its broad implementation. The Substance Use Brief Screen (SUBS) was developed as a brief, self-administered instrument to identify unhealthy use of tobacco, alcohol, illicit drugs, and prescription drugs. We evaluated the validity and test-retest reliability of the SUBS in adult primary care patients. MethodsAdults aged 18-65 years were enrolled from urban safety net primary care clinics to self-administer the SUBS using touch-screen tablet computers for a test-retest reliability study (n = 54) and a 2-site validation study (n = 586). In the test-retest reliability study, the SUBS was administered twice within a 2-week period. In the validation study, the SUBS was compared with reference standard measures, including self-reported measures and oral fluid drug tests. We measured test-retest reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the SUBS for detection of unhealthy use and substance use disorder for tobacco, alcohol, and drugs (illicit and prescription drug misuse). ResultsTest-retest reliability was good or excellent for each substance class. For detection of unhealthy use, the SUBS had sensitivity and specificity of 97.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.7-99.5) and 95.7% (95% CI, 92.4-97.8), respectively, for tobacco; and 85.2% (95% CI, 79.3-89.9) and 77.0% (95% CI, 72.6-81.1) for alcohol. For unhealthy use of illicit or prescription drugs, sensitivity was 82.5% (95% CI, 75.7-88.0) and specificity 91.1% (95% CI, 87.9-93.6). With respect to identifying a substance use disorder, the SUBS had sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (95% CI, 92.7-100.0) and 72.1% (95% CI, 67.1-76.8) for tobacco; 93.5% (95% CI, 85.5-97.9) and 64.6% (95% CI, 60.2-68.7) for alcohol; and 85.7% (95% CI, 77.2-92.0) and 82.0% (95% CI, 78.2-85.3) for drugs. Analyses of area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) indicated good discrimination (AUC 0.74-0.97) for all substance classes. Assistance in completing the SUBS was requested by 11% of participants. ConclusionsThe SUBS was feasible for self-administration and generated valid results in a diverse primary care patient population. The 4-item SUBS can be recommended for primary care settings that are seeking to implement substance use screening.

How Patients Understand the Term “Nonmedical Use” of Prescription Drugs: Insights from Cognitive Interviews

ABSTRACT. Background: With rising rates of prescription drug abuse and associated overdose deaths, there is great interest in having accurate and efficient screening tools that identify nonmedical use of prescription drugs in health care settings. The authors sought to gain a better understanding of how patients interpret questions about misuse of prescription drugs, with the goal of improving the accuracy and acceptability of instruments intended for use in primary care. Methods: A total of 27 English-speaking adult patients were recruited from an urban safety net primary care clinic to complete a cognitive interview about a 4-item screening questionnaire for tobacco, alcohol, illicit drugs, and misuse of prescription drugs. Detailed field notes were analyzed for overall comprehension of the screening items on illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse, the accuracy with which participants classified drugs into these categories, and whether the screening response correctly captured the participant's substance use behavior. Results: Based on initial responses to the screening items, 6 (22%) participants screened positive for past-year prescription drug misuse, and 8 (30%) for illicit drug use. The majority (26/27) of participants correctly interpreted the item on illicit drug use, and appropriately classified drugs in this category. Eleven (41%) participants had errors in their understanding of the prescription drug misuse item. The most common error was classifying use of medications without abuse potential as nonmedical use. All cases of misunderstanding the prescription drug misuse item occurred among participants who screened negative for illicit drug use. Conclusions: The results suggest that terminology used to describe misuse of prescription medications may be misunderstood by many primary care patients, particularly those who do not use illicit drugs. Failure to improve upon the language used to describe prescription drug misuse in screening questionnaires intended for use in medical settings could potentially lead to high rates of false-positive results.

Colorectal cancer screening among underserved minority population: Discrepancy between physicians’ recommended, scheduled, and completed tests

Objective This study examines the correlates of: (1) health care provider recommendation of CRC testing; (2) provider scheduling for recommended CRC testing using sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or double-contrast barium enema; and (3) adherence to CRC scheduling among underserved minority populations. Methods Medical record and schedule logbook reviews and interviewer-administered surveys. Setting: Large urban safety-net, outpatient primary care setting in Los Angeles County. Participants: 306 African-American and Latino patients aged 50 years and older. Results A vast majority of minority patients do not receive standard CRC testing in urban safety-net primary care settings. Of those patients who were actually scheduled for sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, almost half completed the procedure. Completing CRC testing was associated with marital status, co-morbid chronic physical conditions, number of risk factors for colorectal cancer, and lower perceived barriers to CRC testing. Conclusion Effective interventions to reduce CRC mortality among underserved minority populations require an integrated approach that engages patients, providers, and health care systems. Practice implications Designing interventions that (1) increase physician–patient communications for removing patients’ perceived barriers for CRC testing and (2) promote a non-physician-based navigator system that reinforces physicians’ recommendation are strongly recommended.

Patient and provider barriers to colorectal cancer screening in the primary care safety-net

Objectives. This study examines patient and provider barriers to screening for colorectal cancer among low-income uninsured African-Americans aged 50 years or older in an urban safety-net primary care clinic, with the goal of informing a future intervention. Methods. Four focus groups were conducted among 40 patients from, or living in the immediate neighborhood of, a primary care clinic for uninsured residents of Washington, DC. An additional focus group was conducted among primary care providers from the same clinic. Using semistructured open-ended questions, moderators elicited perceptions of barriers and promoters of colorectal cancer screening and suggestions to improve adherence to screening guidelines. The focus groups were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were independently coded by two reviewers using established qualitative methodology. Results. Patient and provider comments from the five focus groups fell into one of eight content areas: primary care characteristics (36% of comments), procedural issues related to screening (16% of comments), knowledge (14% of comments), cost/insurance coverage (13%), ordering of priorities (12%), attitudes (5%), information sources (2%), and perceptions of discrimination (2%). Involving various members of the primary care team in colorectal cancer screening processes, and using reminders with feedback, were identified as promising avenues for future interventions in the safety-net setting. Patients and providers cited the lack of referral sources for colonoscopy for follow-up of abnormal fecal occult blood tests (FOBT), and lack of treatment sources as major barriers to the initiation of colorectal cancer screening in uninsured populations. Conclusions. Organizational level interventions, such as a team approach to colorectal cancer screening, are important areas identified for future colorectal cancer screening interventions in the safety-net primary care setting. Larger policy efforts to provide coverage for screening, diagnosis, and treatment among the uninsured are critical to implementing adequate colorectal cancer screening for this population.