A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study

Lasser, Karen E.; Murillo, Jennifer; Medlin, E. Lander; Lisboa, Sandra; Valley-Shah, Lisa; Fletcher, Robert H.; Emmons, Karen M.; Ayanian, John Z.

doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-37

Cited by 92 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on this definition, we describe our study as an implementation trial. Many prior trials to promote CRC screening have been conducted in clinical settings [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. While a few pilot studies have demonstrated the feasibility of promoting CRC screening in community settings such as churches [18][19][20], few large trials have been conducted in these venues [21,22].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial

Maxwell

Danao

Cayetano

et al. 2015

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of evidence-based strategies to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains challenging. The aim of this study is to evaluate two strategies to implement an evidence-based intervention to promote CRC screening in Filipino American community organizations. Twenty-two community organizations were randomized to either a basic or enhanced implementation strategy. In both arms, community health advisors recruited participants non-adherent to CRC screening guidelines, conducted educational sessions, distributed print materials and free fecal occult blood test kits, reminded participants to get screened, and mailed letters to participants' providers. In the enhanced arm, leaders of the organizations participated in implementation efforts. While the effectiveness was similar in both arms of the study (screening rate at 6-month follow-up was 53 % in the enhanced arm, 49 % in the basic arm), 223 participants were screened in the enhanced arm versus 122 in the basic arm. The enhanced implementation strategy reached 83 % more participants and achieved a higher public health impact.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial

Maxwell

Danao

Cayetano

et al. 2015

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consistent with the literature on implementation, interventions that use a number of different strategies seem to be most effective, and almost all the studies reviewed for the present work used multiple intervention approaches. Some recommendations proposed for enhancing screening in low-income populations included the development of additional educational materials aimed at individuals with a low literacy level 13 ; the use of patient activation, including empowering patients to ask their health care providers about screening 41 ; and the promise of patient navigators 18,36 or lay health advisors 20 as approaches to reduce disparities.…”

Section: Evidence From Research Into Screening Promotion Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canadian Cancer Screening Disparities: A Recent Historical Perspective

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across Canada, introduction of the Pap test for cervical cancer screening, followed by mammography for breast cancer screening and, more recently, the fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening, has contributed to a reduction in cancer mortality. However, another contribution of screening has been disparities in cancer mortality between certain populations. Here, we explore the disparities associated with breast and cervical cancer screening and preliminary data concerning disparities in colorectal cancer screening.Although some disparities in screening utilization have been successfully reduced over time (for example, mammography and Pap test screening in rural and remote populations), screening utilization data for other populations (for example, low-income groups) clearly indicate that disparities have existed and continue to exist across Canada. Organized screening programs in Canada have been able to successfully engage 80% of women for regular cervical cancer screening and 70% of women for regular mammography screening, but of the women who remain to be reached or engaged in regular screening, those with the least resources, those who are the most isolated, and those who are least culturally integrated into Canadian society as a whole are overrepresented. Population differences are also observed for utilization of colorectal cancer screening services.The research literature on interventions to promote screening utilization provides some evidence about what can be done to increase participation in organized screening by vulnerable populations. Adaption and adoption of evidence-based screening promotion interventions can increase the utilization of available screening services by populations that have experienced the greatest burden of disease with the least access to screening services.

show abstract

“…Panel management has been shown to improve health outcomes among patients with a range of conditions, including lowering glycosylated hemoglobin levels in patients with diabetes [6][7][8], and improving smoking cessation rates [9] and self-reported quit attempts by patients who use tobacco products [10]. Panel management has also been shown to enhance care processes, increasing the rates of vaccination and bone density screenings [11], as well as screenings for colorectal and breast cancer [12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinicians’ panel management self-efficacy to support their patients’ smoking cessation and hypertension control needs

Strauß

Jensen

Bennett

et al. 2014

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Panel management, a set of tools and processes for proactively caring for patient populations, has potential to reduce morbidity and improve outcomes between office visits. We examined primary care staff's self-efficacy in implementing panel management, its correlates, and an intervention's impact on this self-efficacy. Primary care teams at two Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospitals were assigned to control or intervention conditions. Staff were surveyed at baseline and postintervention, with a random subset interviewed postintervention. Panel management self-efficacy was higher among staff participating in the panel management intervention. Self-efficacy was significantly correlated with sufficient training, aspects of team member interaction, and frequency of panel management use. Panel management self-efficacy was modest among primary care staff at two VA hospitals. Team level interventions may improve primary care staff's confidence in practicing panel management, with this greater confidence related to greater team involvement with, and use of panel management.

show abstract

A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study

Cited by 92 publications

References 24 publications

Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial

Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial

Canadian Cancer Screening Disparities: A Recent Historical Perspective

Clinicians’ panel management self-efficacy to support their patients’ smoking cessation and hypertension control needs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About