- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT02882620
Enhancing Prevention Pathways Toward Tribal Colorectal Health
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Detailed Description
Despite the effectiveness of CRC screening tests for average risk adults, these tests are under-utilized by AI/ANs. A recent study of AI/ANs who utilize IHS facilities reported that only about 4.0% of average risk AI/ANs age 50-75, compared with nearly 65% of U.S. adults, were current with CRC screening guidelines. The overall objective is to test the efficacy of serially implemented interventions of graded intensity designed to enhance annual CRC screening using the FIT in AI communities. The aims are to:
Aim 1. Finalize and evaluate the efficacy of serially implemented interventions of graded intensity for increasing annual CRC screening uptake.
Aim 2. Determine promoters and barriers to enhancing annual CRC screening practices.
Aim 3. Conduct process evaluation studies on: cost-effectiveness of the interventions, implementation fidelity, and sustainability and scalability.
Protocol A. Aim 1-Qualitative Research (Intervention Finalization)
- Research Design: Qualitative design, using focus group methodology.
- Study Population: Recruited from the project's Community Advisory Council, from the Albuquerque Area Southwest Tribal Epidemiology Center's (AASTEC's) Executive Council, Community Health Representatives, and other tribal stakeholders.
- Recruitment Target: Up to 30-36 eligible (assuming attrition) persons.
- Recruitment Methods: Purposive sampling methods.
- Procedures: Conduct three focus groups, with each group consisting of 6 to 8 participants. Each session will meet for approximately two hours. Before starting the discussion, participants will provide informed consent and complete a survey collecting socio-demographic information. The purpose of these focus groups is to finalize the intervention's educational material, ensuring it is culturally appropriate and contains messages operationalizing various constructs of the theory guiding the study (Health behavior Framework; HBF).
B. Aim 1-Quantitative Research (Efficacy RCT)
- Research Design: Randomly assigned, three-group, pretest-posttest design.
- Research Setting: Six Pueblo Tribes in New Mexico.
- Randomization: Using simple random allocation procedures.
- Participants Identification and Sampling: Identify eligible participants from the IHS Resource and Patient Management System (RPMS) electronic health record system. We will invite all eligible persons (estimated at 1,700) identified through the RPMS to participate.
- Interventions: The interventions are graded in intensity: high intensity, medium intensity, and reference group (usual care).
- Procedures: After randomizing tribes to the three Groups, we will mail a recruitment letter, a consent form for completion of surveys, and a baseline survey. We will mail the first posttest survey 12 months after mailing the baseline survey, with the 2nd and 3rd posttest surveys mailed in successive 12-month intervals. Between the baseline and 1st posttest surveys, participants will receive the group-specific intervention. All eligible adults will be included in the analyses for the primary outcome (ie, completion of the FIT kit) since non-completion of a FIT is a valid response. All eligible participants in Groups 1 and 2 will receive a mailed FIT kit whether or not they return the baseline survey.
- Implementation of the Intervention: We will simultaneously implement the intervention, over three 12-month cycles. For Groups 1 and 2, we will mail the FIT kit, and the educational material about one month following the initial recruitment letter/baseline survey mailing. For Group 1, navigators will offer up to four education outreach sessions. Group 2 will receive the FIT and education material mailing. Group 3 will receive usual care (screening recommendation and a FIT kit at a clinic visit).
- Baseline and Posttest Surveys: These surveys will collect data on CRC-related knowledge, attitudes, perceived control, perceived susceptibility and severity, social support, and self-efficacy. The baseline survey will also collect socio-demographic data.
Data Management and Analysis: We will summarize categorical and continuous variables using descriptive statistics. For all analyses, the overall type I error rate will be α=0.05. We will use appropriate methods such as Tukey's honest significant difference test or a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
For the primary outcome, annual completion of the FIT kit, the primary endpoint is the proportion of participants within each Group who completed and returned 0, 1, 2 or 3 FIT kits. All analyses will be intent-to-treat, since all eligible participants will be included in the analysis. We will compare the primary outcome across interventions via a likelihood ratio test with a multiple comparisons adjustment. To summarize intervention effects, we will report odds ratios and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for completing all 3 FIT kits as compared to returning each of 2, 1, or no FIT kits.
The secondary outcomes are temporal changes in the HBF constructs (eg, knowledge, attitudes, perceived risk) from baseline to 12-month cycles following the baseline survey. We will assess temporal changes in the HBF constructs with repeated measures linear regression modeling to understand the interventions' effects over time. Predictive value of the interventions and the HBF constructs on the yearly FIT uptake will be assessed by refitting the repeated measures logistic regression model described in the primary analysis for the dependent variable of return of completed FIT kit (yes vs. no) at each time point, but also including as a covariate score from all returned surveys measuring HBF constructs. We will report odds ratios (and 95% CIs) for completion by Groups.
- Sample Size Considerations: We powered our study to measure significant changes by Group in the annual completion of the FIT (primary outcome). With hypothesized proportions of participants with 0, 1, 2 or 3 returned FIT kits that reflect an average of 4%, 14% and 24% completing the FIT each year for the three Groups, respectively, the power of the study is ~99% with 566 participants per Group (total=1,698). We adjusted for multiple comparisons in our power calculation by using a Bonferroni correction.
Aim 2-Qualitative Research (Understanding Behavior Change Context)
- Research Design: Qualitative design.
- Study Population: Participants "largely adherent" (completed FIT 2 or 3 of 3 times) and "not adherent" (completed FIT 0 or 1 of 3 times) to guidelines; navigators; providers and medical directors of IHS facilities.
- Recruitment Target: Up to 120-144 participants (assuming attrition) who took part in the Aim 1 Efficacy RCT; with 60 participants "largely adherent" and 60 participants "not adherent" to the FIT guidelines. All the navigators (n=3) working on the project and medical directors (n=3) of the three participating IHS facilities. One health care provider from each of the three participating IHS facilities (n=3).
- Recruitment Methods: Purposive sampling methods.
- Procedures: Conduct 12 focus groups, with each group consisting of 6 to 8 participants. Each session will meet for approximately two hours. Before starting the discussion, participants will provide informed consent. The moderator will explore HBF factors most conducive to being "largely adherent" to screening guidelines. Among participants "not adherent" to CRC screening guidelines, we will inquire about barriers to completing a FIT and their potential solutions. We will also inquire about how we can sustain and scale-up the interventions for broader dissemination.
Conduct interviews with navigators, and health care providers and medical directors of the IHS facilities. Before starting the interview, we will obtain informed consent. Interviews with the navigators will focus on delivery of the intervention, barriers and promoters to providing navigation, participants' reasons for "largely adhering" or "not adhering" to CRC screening guidelines, and strategies to sustain and scale-up the interventions. Interviews with the health care providers and medical directors will focus on systems-level factors that may or may not facilitate delivery of CRC screening services, viability of using navigation for cancer screening in community settings, and strategies to sustain and scale-up the interventions. We will collect baseline socio-demographic information from the participants.
Aim 3-Process Evaluation Studies (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Implementation Fidelity, and Sustainability and Scalability)
- Procedure-Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: We will collect and use primary and secondary data to define parameters for the Markov models of cost-effectiveness. We will include data on CRC epidemiology in New Mexico, screening and treatment costs, and screening compliance rates for each cycle of the serially implemented interventions. We will collect data on all costs including navigation, mailing of FITs, educational material, and follow-up costs by each Group. We will assess direct medical costs through the IHS RPMS, which contains patient encounter-level data by outpatient ICD-9 diagnoses and procedure codes. We will extract data on sensitivity, specificity and efficacy of screening tests from the peer-reviewed literature. We will begin by constructing a decision tree for each of the Groups. We will compute the costs of each decision node (FIT completed/FIT not completed and received colonoscopy/did not receive colonoscopy) based on directly accrued medical and non-medical costs obtained from data sources identified above. The result of the cost-effectiveness analysis will be an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the three Groups.
- Procedure-Implementation Fidelity: We will evaluate fidelity of implementation based on standard components, including: reach to potentially eligible participants; recruitment; resources and expertise needed for the research; the broader content (ie, social, physical, cultural, and structural factors); fidelity of delivery of the interventions; amount of the intervention actually delivered; amount of the intervention actually received; challenges encountered in implementing the research; potential contamination; and number and quality of partnerships.
- Procedure-Sustainability and Scalability: We will operationalize concepts for sustaining and scaling-up efficacious interventions, including: the nature of the interventions; the interventions' efficacy; the cost and cost-effectiveness of the interventions; partnerships; organizational capacity; contextual factors; promoters and barriers; and generalizability to other populations.
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Kevin English, DrPH
- Phone Number: 505-962-2602
- Email: kenglish@aaihb.org
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Shiraz I Mishra, MBBS, PhD
- Phone Number: 505-925-6085
- Email: smishra@salud.unm.edu
Study Locations
-
-
New Mexico
-
Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States, 87131
- University of New Mexico School of Medicine
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
A. Aim 1--Qualitative Research (Intervention Finalization)
Inclusion Criterion:
- Adult (50-75 years) AIs.
Exclusion criteria:
- None
Aim 1--Quantitative Research (Efficacy RCT)
Inclusion Criteria:
- AIs at average-risk for CRC,
- Not "up to date" with US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) CRC screening guidelines (i.e., no guaiac fecal occult blood test [FOBT] or FIT in past year; no flexible sigmoidoscopy in past 5 years; no colonoscopy in past 10 years), and
- Residing in one of the six Pueblo Tribes participating in the research.
Exclusion Criteria: meeting at least one of the following criteria:
- History of CRC, total colectomy, adenomatous polyps, or history of inflammatory bowel disease,
- Up-to-date with CRC screening,
- Severe comorbidity,
- No visit to IHS facilities in the past three years,
- Incarceration,
- Family history of CRC, or
- Hospice/terminal care status.
C. Aim 2--Qualitative Research (Understanding Behavior Change Context)
Inclusion Criteria:
- Participants who completed a FIT (Aim 1),
- Participants who did not complete a FIT (Aim 1),
- Navigators participating in the high intensity interventions (Aim 1),
- Health care providers and medical directors of the IHS facilities participating in the study.
Exclusion Criteria:
- None
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: High Intensity (Group 1)
The high intensity intervention includes: navigated outreach, with four in-depth education outreach sessions; mailed FIT; education material; and follow-up mailed reminders (Group 1).
The navigated outreach includes one-on-one information dissemination about CRC, importance of adhering to CRC screening guidelines, identification and solutions to screening barriers, motivation, self-efficacy and comprehension on how to complete the FIT kit, and gathering (if requested) and return of the completed FIT to the laboratory.
The educational material (brochure) is specially developed and culturally tailored for the six Tribes recruited for this study.
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
The high intensity intervention includes: navigated outreach, with four in-depth education outreach sessions; mailed FIT; education material; and follow-up mailed reminders (Group 1).
The navigated outreach includes one-on-one information dissemination about CRC, importance of adhering to CRC screening guidelines, identification and solutions to screening barriers, motivation, self-efficacy and comprehension on how to complete the FIT kit, and gathering (if requested) and return of the completed FIT to the laboratory.
The educational material (brochure) is specially developed and culturally tailored for the six Tribes recruited for this study.
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
Experimental: Medium Intensity (Group 2)
The medium intensity intervention includes: mailed FIT; education material; and follow-up mailed reminders (Group 2).
The educational material (brochure) is specially developed and culturally tailored for the six Tribes recruited for this study.
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
The medium intensity intervention includes: mailed FIT; education material; and follow-up mailed reminders (Group 2).
The educational material (brochure) is specially developed and culturally tailored for the six Tribes recruited for this study.
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
Experimental: Reference Group (Group 3)
The reference group (Group 3), per IHS guidelines and current standard of care at participating IHS facilities, receives usual care (ie, screening recommendation and a FIT kit at a clinic visit).
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
The reference group (Group 3), per IHS guidelines and current standard of care at participating IHS facilities, receives usual care (ie, screening recommendation and a FIT kit at a clinic visit).
The FIT kit used is the Polymedco OC FIT-CHECK® OC-Light test, which is a single collection test that meets USPSTF's guidelines.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
---|---|
Annual Completion of the FIT Kit
Time Frame: The interventions are delivered over 3 12-month cycles. The primary outcome will be measured within 3 12-month periods. Cycle 1: T1-T12 months; Cycle 2: T13-T24 months; Cycle 3: T25-T36 months
|
The interventions are delivered over 3 12-month cycles. The primary outcome will be measured within 3 12-month periods. Cycle 1: T1-T12 months; Cycle 2: T13-T24 months; Cycle 3: T25-T36 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Change in Knowledge
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess colorectal cancer related knowledge through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including colorectal cancer related knowledge about risk factors, symptoms, its screening tests, and recommended guidelines for screening.
We will aggregate responses on the knowledge-related questions to provide an overall composite knowledge score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in knowledge as the difference in the composite knowledge score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Change in Attitudes
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess colorectal cancer related attitudes through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including colorectal cancer related attitudes about cancer, screening, and prevention.
We will aggregate responses on the attitudes-related questions to provide an overall composite attitude score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in attitudes as the difference in the composite attitude score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Change in Perceived Control
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess perceived control through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including perceived control in getting colorectal cancer, control over its risk factors, and about screening.
We will aggregate responses on the perceived control-related questions to provide an overall composite perceived control score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in perceived control as the difference in the composite perceived control score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Change in Perceived Susceptibility
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess perceived susceptibility through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including perceived susceptibility for colorectal cancer.
We will aggregate responses on the perceived susceptibility-related questions to provide an overall composite perceived susceptibility score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in perceived susceptibility as the difference in the composite perceived susceptibility score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Change in Perceived Severity
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess perceived severity through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including perceived severity of colorectal cancer.
We will aggregate responses on the perceived severity-related questions to provide an overall composite perceived severity score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in perceived severity as the difference in the composite perceived severity score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Change in Self-Efficacy
Time Frame: Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
We will assess self-efficacy through surveys administered at baseline and at three posttests.
The surveys will be mailed 12 months apart.
We will utilize validated questions from the NIH PROMIS instrument repository (http://www.nihpromis.org/),
national surveys, and from our previous studies to measure the important theoretical constructs including self-efficacy with regarding to controlling risk factors and completing colorectal cancer screening.
We will aggregate responses on the self-efficacy-related questions to provide an overall composite self-efficacy score at each of the time points (baseline and the three posttests).
We will compute change in self-efficacy as the difference in the composite self-efficacy score at posttest 1 and at baseline, at posttest 2 and at posttest 1, and at posttest 3 and at posttest 2.
|
Baseline (T0 month), Posttest 1 (T1-T12 months), Posttest 2 (T13-T24 months), Posttest 3 (T25-T36 months)
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Kevin English, DrPH, Albuquerque Area Indian Health Board
- Principal Investigator: Shiraz I Mishra, MBBS, PhD, University of New Mexico School of Medicine
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimated)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 14-363
- R01CA192967 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Colorectal Neoplasm
-
Azienda Ospedaliera di PadovaIstituto Oncologico Veneto IRCCSRecruitingColorectal Adenocarcinoma | Colorectal Liver Metastases | Unresectable Malignant NeoplasmItaly
-
Carol Davila University of Medicine and PharmacyRecruitingNeoplasm, Colorectal | Neoplasm, Stomach | Neoplasm, Esophagus | Neoplasm, DuodenalRomania
-
Koen RoversHoffmann-La Roche; Comprehensive Cancer Centre The Netherlands; Dutch Cancer...RecruitingColorectal Cancer | Peritoneal Neoplasms | Colorectal Neoplasm | Peritoneal Carcinomatosis | Colorectal Carcinoma | Peritoneal Cancer | Peritoneal Metastases | Colorectal Adenocarcinoma | Colorectal Neoplasms Malignant | Peritoneal Neoplasm Malignant Secondary Carcinomatosis | Peritoneal Neoplasm Malignant...Netherlands, Belgium
-
M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterNational Cancer Institute (NCI)RecruitingMetastatic Malignant Neoplasm in the Liver | Advanced Malignant Neoplasm | Refractory Malignant Neoplasm | Colorectal Carcinoma Metastatic in the LiverUnited States
-
M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Active, not recruitingStage IV Colorectal Cancer AJCC v7 | Stage IVA Colorectal Cancer AJCC v7 | Stage IVB Colorectal Cancer AJCC v7 | Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma | Metastatic Malignant Neoplasm in the Liver | Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma | Metastatic Malignant Neoplasm in the Lung | Resectable Colorectal CarcinomaUnited States
-
Mayo ClinicRecruitingColorectal Cancer | Colorectal Liver MetastasesUnited States
-
Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen UniversityUnknownColorectal Cancer | Neoplasm | Metastatic NeoplasmChina
-
TransgeneTerminatedColorectal Neoplasm | Digestive System NeoplasmFrance, Spain, Belgium
-
Fundació Institut de Recerca de l'Hospital de la...UnknownColorectal Cancer | AngiogenesisSpain
-
Bristol-Myers SquibbNovartisActive, not recruitingColorectal Cancer | Colorectal Neoplasm | Colorectal Tumors | Colorectal CarcinomaItaly, United States, Canada, Spain, Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, Czechia, Germany
Clinical Trials on High Intensity (Group 1)
-
Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation...Edge Hill UniversityCompletedHeart Disease | Heart AttacksUnited Kingdom
-
Riphah International UniversityCompleted
-
Universidad Católica San Antonio de MurciaEnrolling by invitation
-
National Taiwan Normal UniversityRecruiting
-
University of MichiganCompletedGlucose IntoleranceUnited States
-
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisRecruitingPeripheral Arterial DiseaseSwitzerland
-
Oslo Metropolitan UniversityThe Dam FoundationCompletedRheumatic DiseasesNorway
-
Laboratoire des Adaptations Métaboliques à l'Exercice...CREPS Auvergne Rhône-Alpes / VichyCompletedOverweight | PostmenopausalFrance
-
University of British ColumbiaCompletedPsychological Distress | Health Behavior | Depressive SymptomatologyCanada
-
Halic UniversityCompletedHigh-Intensity Interval Training | Blood Flow Restriction ExerciseTurkey