Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Use of Interactive Voice Response to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening

Bibliographic Data

ID9101570
AuthorsHannah Cohen-Cline (0000-0003-4607-8762, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, corresponding author), Karen J Wernli (0000-0001-7945-0327, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, corresponding author), Susan Carol Bradford (University of Washington), Mary Boles-Hall (University of Washington), David C Grossman (Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, corresponding author)
Year2014
Volume52
Issue6
Pages496-499
Publication date2014-06-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedical Care (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948
PublisherOvid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1097/mlr.0000000000000116
PMID24638119
OpenAlexW1978301842
LanguageEN

INTRODUCTION: Only 63% of the US population aged 50-75 years is adherent with recommended colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines. Efforts are needed to increase screening for CRC. METHODS: We evaluated a quality improvement intervention conducted in 2010 at Group Health in Washington State to assess the use of interactive voice response (IVR) systems to improve CRC screening. Eligible members were aged 50-81 years, received primary care from a contracted physician, and were due for CRC screening. A total of 13,279 members were identified and randomly assigned to either: (1) an intervention with IVR to encourage CRC screening (n=10,000), or (2) usual care (n=3279). The primary outcome was receipt of any recommended CRC screening test at 6 months postintervention or index date. We used Cox proportional hazards to model time until receipt of CRC screening at 6 months. RESULTS: Adherence to CRC screening was 10.0% in the intervention arm and 7.8% in the usual care arm at 6 months. Randomization to the IVR intervention arm was associated with a 32% increased likelihood of receiving CRC screening (hazard ratio=1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.14, 1.52) compared with usual care. The difference in CRC screening uptake was apparent by 3 months and persisted for 12 months postintervention (log-rank test, P=0.0012). DISCUSSION: Our analysis provides "real-world" evidence that IVR is effective when delivered by a commercial health plan, and may be a useful tool for increasing adherence to screening guidelines among patients outside an integrated care practice

Cancer · Cancer screening · Colorectal cancer · Confidence interval · Family medicine · Hazard ratio · Interactive voice response · Intervention (counseling) · Physical therapy · Population · Randomization · Randomized controlled trial · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening · Internal Medicine · Medicine · Nursing · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae