Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30359468/ below:

Effectiveness and cost of multilayered colorectal cancer screening promotion interventions at federally qualified health centers in Washington State

Affiliations

• ¹ HealthPoint, Renton, Washington.
• ² Washington State Department of Health, Tumwater, Washington.
• ³ RTI International, Waltham, Massachusetts, North Carolina.
• ⁴ Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

• PMID: 30359468
• PMCID: PMC6263795
• DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31693

Item in Clipboard

Kathryn E Kemper et al. Cancer. 2018.

• ¹ HealthPoint, Renton, Washington.
• ² Washington State Department of Health, Tumwater, Washington.
• ³ RTI International, Waltham, Massachusetts, North Carolina.
• ⁴ Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

• PMID: 30359468
• PMCID: PMC6263795
• DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31693

Item in Clipboard

Background: It has been demonstrated that fecal immunochemical test (FIT) mailing programs are effective for increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The objectives of the current study were to assess the magnitude of uptake that could be achieved with a mailed FIT program in a federally qualified health center and whether such a program can be implemented at a reasonable cost to support sustainability.

Methods: The Washington State Department of Health's partner HealthPoint implemented a direct-mail FIT program at 9 medical clinics, along with a follow-up reminder letter and automated telephone calls to those not up-to-date with recommended screening. Supplemental outreach events at selected medical clinics and a 50th birthday card screening reminder program also were implemented. The authors collected and analyzed process, effectiveness, and cost measures and conducted a systematic assessment of the short-term cost effectiveness of the interventions.

Results: Overall, 5178 FIT kits were mailed with 4009 follow-up reminder letters, and 8454 automated reminder telephone calls were made over 12 months. In total, 1607 FIT kits were returned within 3 months of the end of the implementation period: an overall return rate of 31% for the mailed FIT program. The average total intervention cost per FIT kit returned was $39.81, and the intervention implementation cost per kit returned was $18.76.

Conclusions: The mailed FIT intervention improved CRC screening uptake among HealthPoint's patient population. This intervention was implemented for less than $40 per individual successfully screened. The findings and lessons learned can assist other clinics that serve disadvantaged populations to increase their CRC screening adherence.

Keywords: Washington; cancer screening; colorectal cancer; community health centers; health care economics and organizations; reminder system.

© 2018 American Cancer Society.

PubMed Disclaimer

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES

The authors made no disclosures.

These are wordless instructions for…

These are wordless instructions for the fecal immunochemical test.

These are wordless instructions for the fecal immunochemical test.

This chart illustrates the percentage…

This chart illustrates the percentage of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits returned by…

This chart illustrates the percentage of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits returned by language used for the mailed FIT intervention. Note that some return rates are based on small numbers, and results may not be stable.

• Direct-to-member mailed colorectal cancer screening outreach for Medicaid and Medicare enrollees: Implementation and effectiveness outcomes from the BeneFIT study.

  Coronado GD, Green BB, West II, Schwartz MR, Coury JK, Vollmer WM, Shapiro JA, Petrik AF, Baldwin LM. Coronado GD, et al. Cancer. 2020 Feb 1;126(3):540-548. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32567. Epub 2019 Oct 28. Cancer. 2020. PMID: 31658375 Free PMC article.

• Effectiveness of a Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Program in Community Health Clinics: The STOP CRC Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

  Coronado GD, Petrik AF, Vollmer WM, Taplin SH, Keast EM, Fields S, Green BB. Coronado GD, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Sep 1;178(9):1174-1181. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3629. JAMA Intern Med. 2018. PMID: 30083752 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.

• A conceptual framework and metrics for evaluating multicomponent interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening within an organized screening program.

  Subramanian S, Hoover S, Tangka FKL, DeGroff A, Soloe CS, Arena LC, Schlueter DF, Joseph DA, Wong FL. Subramanian S, et al. Cancer. 2018 Nov 1;124(21):4154-4162. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31686. Epub 2018 Oct 25. Cancer. 2018. PMID: 30359464 Free PMC article.

• Cost-Effectiveness of Current Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests.

  Ladabaum U. Ladabaum U. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020 Jul;30(3):479-497. doi: 10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.005. Epub 2020 Apr 9. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020. PMID: 32439083 Review.

• Proven Strategies for Increasing Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening.

  Butterly LF. Butterly LF. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020 Jul;30(3):377-392. doi: 10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.003. Epub 2020 Apr 9. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020. PMID: 32439077 Review.

• Costs and outcomes of colorectal cancer screening program in Isfahan, Iran.

  Rahimi F, Rezayatmand R, Shojaeenejad J, Tabesh E, Ravankhah Z, Adibi P. Rahimi F, et al. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Jan 5;23(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-09010-1. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023. PMID: 36604670 Free PMC article.

• Factors Influencing Implementation of a Colorectal Cancer Screening Improvement Program in Community Health Centers: an Applied Use of Configurational Comparative Methods.

  Petrik AF, Green B, Schneider J, Miech EJ, Coury J, Retecki S, Coronado GD. Petrik AF, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Nov;35(Suppl 2):815-822. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06186-2. Epub 2020 Oct 26. J Gen Intern Med. 2020. PMID: 33107003 Free PMC article.

• Colorectal Cancer Screening After Sequential Outreach Components in a Demographically Diverse Cohort.

  Podmore C, Selby K, Jensen CD, Zhao WK, Weiss NS, Levin TR, Schottinger J, Doubeni CA, Corley DA. Podmore C, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Apr 1;7(4):e245295. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.5295. JAMA Netw Open. 2024. PMID: 38625704 Free PMC article.

• Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Mailed FIT in a Safety Net Clinic Population.

  Pignone M, Lanier B, Kluz N, Valencia V, Chang P, Olmstead T. Pignone M, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Nov;36(11):3441-3447. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-06691-y. Epub 2021 Apr 30. J Gen Intern Med. 2021. PMID: 33929646 Free PMC article.

1. 1. US Preventive Services Task Force, Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;315:2564–2575. - PubMed
2. 1. Washington State Department of Health. Washington State Cancer Registry. Cancer by Site. Tumwater, WA: Washington State Department of Health; 2014. Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/wscr/WSCR/PDF/14Report/CancerBySite14.pdf. Accessed February 2, 2018.
3. 1. Washington State Department of Health. Health of Washington State: Colorectal Cancer. Tumwater, WA: Washington State Department of Health; 2013. Available at: https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/1500/CD-CCN2013.pdf. Accessed March 31, 2015.
4. 1. US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration. 2016. Health Center Data: Washington Program Grantee Data. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services; Available at: https://bphc.hrsa.gov/uds/data-center.aspx?q=d&year=2016&state=WA#glist. Accessed October 3, 2017.
5. 1. White A, Thompson TD, White MC, et al. Cancer screening test use—United States, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:201–206. - PMC - PubMed

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3