Tailored Navigation in Colorectal Cancer Screening
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9102698 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ronald E Myers (0000-0002-8059-7390, Thomas Jefferson University, corresponding author), Terry Hyslop (0000-0002-3930-8876), Randa Sifri (Thomas Jefferson University), Heather Bittner-Fagan, Heather Bittner Fagan (0000-0002-0222-2446), Nora C Katurakes, Nora Katurakes, James Cocroft (corresponding author), Melissa DiCarlo (0000-0003-0171-2395, corresponding author), Thomas Wolf (0000-0002-7134-7314, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2008 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | S123-S131 |
| Publication date | 2008-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/mlr.0b013e31817fdf46 |
| PMID | 18725824 |
| OpenAlex | W2054949840 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 31 |
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized. Effective methods to increase screening use are needed. This study sought to determine the impact of tailored navigation on CRC screening in primary care. METHODS: The study included 154 primary care practice patients who were 50 or more years of age, were eligible for CRC screening, and had an office visit within 2 years before study initiation. Baseline telephone survey data were collected on participant sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, and screening test [fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or colonoscopy] decision stage. By comparing decision stage data, we identified that test with the highest decision stage (ie, preferred screening test). Participants who preferred FOBT were sent an FOBT kit and a reminder. Those preferring colonoscopy were sent colonoscopy instructions. After this mailing, a study patient navigator made a telephone call to guide participants towards screening. Six-month end point survey and medical records data were obtained. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of screening and of change in preferred screening test decision stage. RESULTS: At end point, 63 (41%) study participants had screened. From baseline to end point, overall screening preference increased for 75 (63%) participants. Age and perceived salience and coherence (ie, screening is important and sensible) were positive, significant predictors of screening use (P = 0.02 and P = 0.05, respectively); while only age predicted change in overall screening preference (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Study participant screening use and preference increased. Age and attitudes predicted outcomes. Randomized trials are needed to determine intervention impact at the population level
Cancer · Cancer screening · Colonoscopy · Colorectal cancer · Family medicine · Fecal occult blood · Medical record · Psychosocial · Randomized controlled trial · Test (biology) · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection · Genetic factors in colorectal cancer · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening · Internal Medicine · Medicine
Knowledge of Polyp History and Recommended Follow-Up Among a Predominately African American Patient Population and the Impact of Patient Navigation
Culturally-adapted behavioral intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake among foreign-born South Asians in New Jersey
Improving Colorectal Cancer Screening Through Research in Primary Care Settings
Automated Telephone Calls Improved Completion of Fecal Occult Blood Testing
Evaluating Approaches to Increase Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening
The precaution adoption process
Healthy People 2010
Use of a Patient Navigator to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Urban Neighborhood Health Clinic
Evaluation of an Intervention to Increase Screening Colonoscopy in an Urban Public Hospital Setting
Telephone Outreach to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Urban Minority Population
What is the Concordance Between the Medical Record and Patient Self-Report as Data Sources for Ambulatory Care
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,28 |
| Citation span | 2008 - 2018 (11) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |