Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol

Karen Kim, Blasé Polite, Donald Hedeker, David Liebovitz, Fornessa Randal, Manasi Jayaprakash, Michael Quinn, Sang Mee Lee, Helen Lam, Karen Kim, Blasé Polite, Donald Hedeker, David Liebovitz, Fornessa Randal, Manasi Jayaprakash, Michael Quinn, Sang Mee Lee, Helen Lam

Abstract

Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation's most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation.

Methods: This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase.

Discussion: There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study.

Trial registration: This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04514341 ) on 14 August 2020.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; FQHC; Federally qualified health center; Implementation strategy; Multilevel intervention; Stepped wedge design.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Multilevel influences on cancer control behavior
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Conceptual framework for ACCSIS–Chicago
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
CRC screening and the proposed multilevel intervention
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Stepped wedge study design

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7–34. doi: 10.3322/caac.21551.
    1. Joseph DA, King JB, Dowling NE, Thomas CC, Richardson LC. Vital sign: colorectal cancer screening test use—United States, 2018. MMWR. 2020;69(10):253–259.
    1. CDC . Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey data. Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2010.
    1. Cyhaniuk A, Coombes ME. Longitudinal adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Am J Manag Care. 2016;22:105–111.
    1. Etzioni DA, Ponce NA, Babey SH, et al. A population-based study of colorectal cancer test use: results from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey. Cancer. 2004;101:2523–2532. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20692.
    1. List DT, Baker DW. Understanding current racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening in the United States: the contribution of socioeconomic status and access to care. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46:228–236. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.023.
    1. Klabunde CN, Cronin KA, Breen N, Waldron WR, Ambs AH, Nadel MR. Trends in colorectal cancer test use among vulnerable populations in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2011;20:1611–1621. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0220.
    1. Gupta S, Tong L, Allison JE, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer in a safety-net health care system: access to care is critical and has implications for screening policy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2009;18:2373–2379. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0344.
    1. 2018 Program grantee comparison data. Health Resources and Service Administration. 2018. . Accessed 18 Apr 2020.
    1. Daly JM, Levy BT, Moss CA, Bay CP. System strategies for colorectal cancer screening at Federally Qualified Health Centers. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(1):212–218. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301790.
    1. Inadomi JM, Vijan S, Janz NK, et al. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening: a randomized clinical trial of competing strategies. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:575–582. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.332.
    1. Singal AG, Gupta S, Tiro JA, et al. Outreach invitations for FIT and colonoscopy improve colorectal cancer screening rates: a randomized controlled trial in a safety-net health system. Cancer. 2016;122:456–463. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29770.
    1. Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racial/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46:S10–S16. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817d932e.
    1. Callen JL, Westbrook JI, Georgiou A, et al. failure to follow-up test results for ambulatory patients: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(10):1334–1348. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1949-5.
    1. Myers RE, Balshem AM, Wolf TA, et al. Screening for colorectal neoplasia: physicians’ adherence to complete diagnostic evaluation. Am J Public Health. 1993;83(11):1620–1622. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.83.11.1620.
    1. Chauvin P, Josselin JM, Heresbach D. The influence of waiting times on cost-effectiveness: a case study of colorectal cancer mass screening. Eur J Health Econ. 2014;15(8):801–812. doi: 10.1007/s10198-013-0525-9.
    1. McCarthy AM, Kim JJ, Beaber EF, et al. Follow-up of abnormal breast and colorectal cancer screening by race/ethnicity. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(4):507–512. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.017.
    1. Tosteson ANA, Beaber EF, Tiro J, et al. Variation in screening abnormality rates and follow-up of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening within the PROSPR consortium. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;31(4):372–379. doi: 10.1007/s11606-015-3552-7.
    1. Carlson CM, Kirby KA, Casadei MA, Partin MR, Kistler CE, Walter LC. Lack of follow-up after fecal occult blood testing in older adults: inappropriate screening or failure to follow-up? Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:249–256. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.372.
    1. Choi KS, Lee HY, Jun JK, Shin A, Park EC. Adherence to follow-up after a positive fecal occult blood test in an organized colorectal cancer screening program in Korea, 2004-2008. J Gastroenterlo Hepatol. 2012;27:1070–1077. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06944.x.
    1. Ferrat E, le Breton J, Veerabudun K, Bercier S, Brixi Z, Khoshnood B, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: factors associated with colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test. Br J Cancer. 2013;109:1437–1444. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.476.
    1. Miglioretti DL, Rutter CM, Bradford SC, Zauber AC, Kessler LG, Feuer EJ, et al. Improvement in the diagnostic evaluation of a positive fecal occult blood test in an integrated health care organization. Med Care. 2008;46:S91–106. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817946c8.
    1. Rao SK, Schilling TF, Sequist TD. Challenges in the management of positive fecal occult blood tests. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24:356–360. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0893-5.
    1. Shields HM, Weiner MD, Henry DR, Lloyd JA, Ransil BJ, Lamphier DA, et al. Factors that influence the decision to do an adequate evaluation of a patient with a positive stool for occult blood. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:196–203. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.03475.x.
    1. Fisher DA, Jeffreys A, Coffman CJ, Fasanella K. Barriers to full colon evaluation for a positive fecal occult blood test. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2006;15:1232–1235. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0916.
    1. Morris S, Baio G, Kendall E, von Wagner C, Wardle J, Atkin W, et al. Socioeconomic variation in uptake of colonoscopy following a positive fecal occult blood test result: a retrospective analysis of the NHS Bowel Screening Programme. Br J Cancer. 2012;107:765–771. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.303.
    1. Pasat L, Rabeneck L, Kiefer L, Mai V, Ritvo P, Sullivan T. Endoscopic follow-up of positive fecal occult blood testing in the Ontario FOBT Project. Can J Gastroenterol. 2007;21:379–382. doi: 10.1155/2007/569689.
    1. Issaka RB, Singh MH, Oshima SM, Laleau VJ, Rachocki CD, Chen EH, et al. Inadequate utilization of diagnostic colonoscopy following abnormal FIT results in an integrated safety-net system. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017;112:375–382. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2016.555.
    1. Chubak J, Garcia MP, Burnett-Hartman AN, Zheng Y, Corley DA, Halm EA, et al. Time to colonoscopy after positive fecal blood test in four U.S. health care systems. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2016;25(2):344–350. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0470.
    1. Oluloro A, Petrik AF, Turner A, Kapka T, Rivelli J, Carney PA, et al. Timeliness of colonoscopy after abnormal fecal test results in a safety net practice. J Community Health. 2016;41:864–870. doi: 10.1007/s10900-016-0165-y.
    1. Engel GL. The clinical application of the biopsychosocial approach. I. In: Frankel RM, Quill TE, McDaniel S, editors. The Biopsychosocial Approach: Past, Present, Future. NY: University of Rochester Press; 2003. pp. 1–20.
    1. Sallis JF, Cervero RB, Ascher W, Henderson KA, Kraft MK, Kerr J. An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:297–322. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102100.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP): Social Ecological Model: CDC; 2015. . Access 17 Apr 2017.
    1. Clauser SB, Taplin SH, Foster MK, Fagan P, Kaluzny AD. Multilevel intervention research: lessons learned and pathways forward. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):127–133. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs019.
    1. Yano EM, Green LW, Glanz K, Ayanian JZ, Mittman BS, Chollette V, et al. Implementation and spread of interventions into the multilevel context of routine practice and policy: implications for the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):86–99. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs004.
    1. Flood AB, Fennell ML, Devers KJ. Health reforms as examples of multilevel interventions in cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):80–85. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs012.
    1. Taplin SH, Anhang Price R, Edwards HM, Foster MK, Breslau ES, Chollette V, et al. Introduction: understanding and influencing multilevel factors across the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):2–10. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs008.
    1. Stange KC, Breslau ES, Dietrich AJ, Glasgow RE. State-of-the-art and future directions in multilevel interventions across the cancer control continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):20–31. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs006.
    1. Edwards HM, Taplin SH, Chollette V, Clauser SB, Das IP, Kaluzny AD. Summary of the multilevel interventions in health care conference. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012(44):123–126. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs018.
    1. Klabunde CN, Vernon SW, Nadel MR, Breen N, Seeff LC, Brown ML. Barriers to colorectal cancer screening; a comparison of reports from primary care physicians and average risk adults. Med Care. 2005;43:939–944. doi: 10.1097/.
    1. Wee CC, Mccarthy EP, Phillips RS. Factors associated with colon cancer screening: the role of patient factors and physician counseling. Prev Med. 2005;41:23–29. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.11.004.
    1. Brenes GA, Paskett ED. Predictors of adoption for colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med. 2000;31:410–416. doi: 10.1006/pmed.2000.0729.
    1. Zapka JM, Klabunde CN, Arora NK, Yuan G, Smith JL, Kobrin SC. Physicians’ colorectal cancer screening discussion and recommendation patterns. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2001;20:509–521. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0749.
    1. Teng EJ, Friedman LC, Green CE. Determinants of colorectal cancer screening behavior among Chinese Americans. Psycho-Oncology. 2006;15:374–381. doi: 10.1002/pon.958.
    1. DeVoe JE, Fryer GE, Phillips R, Green L. Receipt of preventive care among adults: insurance status and usual source of care. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:786–791. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.93.5.786.
    1. Ioannou GN, Chapko MK, Dominitz JA. Predictors of colorectal cancer screening participation in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2082–2091. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07574.x.
    1. Palmer RC, Vernon SW, Nadel MR, et al. Social disparities across the continuum of colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:55–61. doi: 10.1007/s10552-004-1253-3.
    1. Carcaise-Edinboro P, Bradley CJ. Influence of patient-provider communication on colorectal cancer screening. Med Care. 2008;46:738–745. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318178935a.
    1. Wackerbarth SB, Tarasenko YN, Joyce JM, Haist SA. Physician colorectal cancer screening recommendations: an examination based on informed decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;66:43–50. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.10.003.
    1. Farmer MM, Bastani R, Kwan I, Belman M, Ganz PA. Predictors of colorectal cancer screening from patients enrolled in a managed care health plan. Cancer. 2008;112:30–38. doi: 10.1002/cncr.23290.
    1. Gilbert A, Kanerak N. Colorectal cancer screening: physician recommendation is influential advice to Marylanders. Prev Med. 2005;41:367–379. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2005.01.008.
    1. Mandleson MT, Curry SJ, Anderson IA, Nadel MR, et al. Colorectal cancer screening participation by older women. Am J Prev Med. 2000;19:149–154. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(00)00193-8.
    1. Jo AM, Maxwell AE, Rick AJ, Cha J, Bastani R. Why are Korean American physicians reluctant to recommend colorectal cancer screening to Korean American patients? J Immigr Minor Health. 2009;11:302–309. doi: 10.1007/s10903-008-9165-z.
    1. Fritz C, Naylor K, Kim K. Knowledge of polyp history and recommended follow-up among a predominately African American patient population and the impact of patient navigation. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2016;3:403–412. doi: 10.1007/s40615-015-0152-5.
    1. Laiyem AO, Adebogun AO, Doubnia CA, et al. Influence of provider discussion and specific recommendation on colorectal cancer screening uptake among U.S. adults. Prev Med. 2014;67:1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.06.022.
    1. Peterson EB, Ostroff JS, DuHamel KN, D’Agostino TA, Hernandez M, Canzona MR, Bylund CL. Impact of provider-patient communication on screening adherence: a systematic review. Prev Med. 2016;93:96–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.09.034.
    1. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A, et al. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:796–804.
    1. Golin C, DiMatteo MR, Duan N, Leake B, Gelberg L. Impoverished diabetic patients whose doctors facilitate their participation in medical decision making are more satisfied with their care. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:857–866.
    1. Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH. Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52:1865–1878. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00303-8.
    1. Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Gandek B, Rogers WH, Ware JE. Characteristics of physicians with participatory decision-making styles. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:497–504. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-124-5-199603010-00007.
    1. Ling BS, Schoen RE, Trauth JM, et al. Physicians encouraging colorectal screening: a randomized controlled trial of enhanced office and patient management on compliance with colorectal cancer screening. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:47–55. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2008.519.
    1. Roetzheim RG, Christman LK, Jacobsen PB, et al. A randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers. Ann Fam Med. 2004;2:294–300. doi: 10.1370/afm.101.
    1. Ornstein S, Nemeth LS, Jenkins RG, Nietert PJ. Colorectal cancer screening in primary care: translating research into practice. Med Care. 2010;48:900–906. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181ec5591.
    1. Curry WJ, Lengerich EJ, Kluhsman BC, Graybill MA, Liao JZ, Schaefer EW, Spleen AM, Dignan MB. Academic detailing to increase colorectal cancer screening by primary care practices in Appalachian Pennsylvania. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:112. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-112.
    1. Dignan M, Shelton B, Slone SA, Tolle C, Mohammad S, Schoenberg, Pearce K, Van Meter Z, Ely G. Effectiveness of a primary care practice intervention for increasing colorectal cancer screening in Appalachian Kentucky. Prev Med. 2014;58:70–74. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.10.018.
    1. Shankaran V, Luu TH, Nonzee N, Richey E, McKoy JM, Graffzivin J, et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness of a health care provider-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5370–5375. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.6458.
    1. Mader EM, Fox CH, Epling JW, Noronha GJ, Swanger CM, Wisiniewaki AM, Vitale K, Norton AL, Morley CP. A practice facilitation and academic detailing intervention can improve cancer screening rates in primary care safety net clinics. J Am Board Fam Med. 2016;29:533–542. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.05.160109.
    1. Baron RC, Melillo S, Rimer BK, et al. Intervention to increase recommendation and delivery of screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by healthcare providers: a systematic review of provider reminders. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38:110–117. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.09.031.
    1. Uy C, Lopez J, Trinh-Shevrin C, Kwon SC, Sherman SE, Liang PS. Text messaging intervention on cancer screening rates: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19:e296. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7893.
    1. Wu Y, Liang Y, Zhou Q, Liu H, Lin G, Cai W, Li Y, Gi J. Effectiveness of short message service intervention to motivate people with positive results in preliminary colorectal cancer screening to undergo colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer. 2019;125:2252–2261. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32043.
    1. Azulay R, Valinsky L, Hershkowitz F, Maghezi R. Repeated automated mobile text messaging reminders for follow-up of positive fecal occult blood tests: randomized controlled trial. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2019;7:e11114. doi: 10.2196/11114.
    1. Walter B, Klare P, Aschenbeck J, Ludwig L, Dimopoulos N, Mayr M, Neu B, et al. Improving the quality and acceptance of colonoscopy with short message service: results from a randomized multicenter study (PERICLES – II) Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;89:506–513. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.014.
    1. Walter BM, Klare P, Neu B, Schmid RM, von DS. Development and testing of an automated 4-day text messaging guidance as an aid for improving colonoscopy preparation. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4:e75. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.5289.
    1. Lee YJ, Kim ES, Choi JH, Park KS, Cho KB, Jang BK, Chung WJ, Hwang JS. Impact of reinforced education by telephone and short message service on the quality of bowel preparation: a randomized controlled study. Endoscopy. 2015;47:1018–1027. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1392406.
    1. Chen LA, Santos S, Jandorf L, Christie J, Castillo A, Winkel G, et al. A program to enhance completion of screening colonoscopy among urban minorities. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:443–450. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2007.12.009.
    1. Christie J, Itzkowitz S, Lihau-Nkanza I, Castillo A, Redd W, Jandorf L. A randomized controlled trial using patient navigation to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income minorities. J Natl Med Assoc. 2008;100:278–284. doi: 10.1016/S0027-9684(15)31240-2.
    1. Jandorf L, Gutierrez Y, Christie J, Itzkowitz SH. Use of a patient navigator to increase colorectal cancer screening in an urban neighborhood health clinic. J Urban Health. 2005;82:216–224. doi: 10.1093/jurban/jti046.
    1. Lasser KE, Murillo J, Medlin E, Lisboa S, Valley-Shah L, Fletcher RH, et al. A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2009;10:37. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-37.
    1. Percac-Lima S, Grant RW, Green A, Ashburner J, Gamba G, et al. A patient-tailored navigator program for colorectal cancer screening in a community health center: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23:237–238.
    1. Myers RE, Bittner-Fagan H, Daskalakis C, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a tailored navigation and a standard intervention in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2013;22:109–117. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0701.
    1. Green BB, Wang CY, Anderson MI, et al. Automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;15:301–311. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303050-00002.
    1. Percac-Lima S, Ashburner JM, Zai AH, et al. Patient navigation for comprehensive cancer screening in high-risk patients using a population-based health information technology system: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176:930–937. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0841.
    1. Thamarasseril S, Phuket T, Chan C, Liu B, Wong RJ. The need for an integrated patient navigation pathway to improve access to colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical testing: a safety-net hospital experience. J Community Health. 2018;63:242–247.
    1. Freund KM, Battaglia TA, Calhoun E, Darnell JS, Dudley DJ, Fiscella K, et al. Impact of patient navigation on timely cancer care: the patient navigation research program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju115. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju115.
    1. Paskett ED, Katz ML, Post DM, Pennell ML, Young GS, Seiber EE, et al. The Ohio Patient Navigator Research Program: does the American Cancer Society Patient Navigation Model improve time to resolution in patients with abnormal screening tests? Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2012;21(10):1620–1628. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0523.
    1. Green BB, Anderson ML, Wang CY, Vernon SW, Chubak J, Meenan RT, et al. Results of nurse navigator follow-up after a positive colorectal cancer screening test: a randomized trial. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27(6):789–795. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2014.06.140125.
    1. Wells KJ, Lee JH, Calcano ER, Meade CD, Rivera M, Fulp WJ, et al. A cluster randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation in improving quality of diagnostic care for patients with breast or colorectal cancer abnormalities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2012;21(10):1664–1672. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0448.
    1. DeGroff A, Gressard L, Glover-Kudon R, Rice K, Tharpe FS, Escoffery C, Gersten J, Butterly L. Assessing the implementation of a patient navigation intervention for colonoscopy screening. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:803. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4601-4.
    1. Rice K, Sharma K, Chunyu L, Gersten J, Butterly L, DeGroff A. Cost-effectiveness of a patient navigation intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income adults in New Hampshire. Cancer. 2019;125:601–609. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31864.
    1. Rice K, Gressard L, DeGroff A, Gersten J, Robie J, Leadbetter S, Glover-Kudon R, Butterly L. Increasing colonoscopy screening in disparate populations: results from an evaluation of patient navigation in the New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. Cancer. 2017;123:3356–3366. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30761.
    1. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
    1. Kegler MC, Liang S, Weiner BJ, Tu SP, Friedman DB, Glenn BA, et al. Measuring constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research in the context of increasing colorectal cancer screening in federally qualified health center. Health Serv Res. 2018;53:4178–4203. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13035.
    1. Walker TJ, Rodriguez SA, Vernon SW, Savas LS, Frost EL, Fernandez ME. Validity and reliability of measures to assess constructs from the inner setting domain of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research in a pediatric clinic network implementing HPV programs. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:205. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4021-5.
    1. Fernandez ME, Walker TJ, Weiner BJ, Calo WA, Liang S, Risendal B, et al. Developing measures to assess constructs from the inner setting domain of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implement Sci. 2018;13:52. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0736-7.
    1. Helfrich CD, Li YF, Sharp ND, Sales AE. Organizational readiness to change assessment (ORCA): developing of an instrument based on the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARHS) framework. Implement Sci. 2009;4:38. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-38.
    1. Cleary PD, Gross CP, Zaslavsky AM, Taplin SH. Multilevel interventions: study design and analysis issues. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;44:49–55. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs010.
    1. Hemming K, Haines TP, Clinton PJ, Girling AJ, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge cluster randomized trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting. BMJ. 2015;351:h391. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h391.
    1. Hardly MA, Schillinger D, Shiboski S. Quasi-experimental designs in practice-based research setting: design and implementation considerations. J Am Board Fam Med. 2011;24:589–596. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.05.110067.
    1. Rhoda DA, Murray DM, Andridge RR, Pennell ML, Hade EM. Studies with staggered starts: multiple baseline designs and group-randomized trials. Am J Public Health. 2011;101:2164–2169. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300264.
    1. Carle AC, Jean-Pierre P, Winters P, Valverde P, Wells K, Simon M, Raich P, Patierno S, Katz M, Freund KM, Dudley D, Fiscella K. Psychometric evaluation of the patient satisfaction with logistical aspects of navigation (PSN-L) scale using item response theory. Med Care. 2014;52(4):354–361. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000089.
    1. Dean BB, Lam J, Natoli JL, et al. Use of electronic medical records for health outcomes research: a literature review. Med Care Res Rev. 2009;66:611–638. doi: 10.1177/1077558709332440.
    1. Tannen RL, Weiner MG, Marcus SM. Simulation of the Syst-Eur randomized control trial using a primary care electronic medical record was feasible. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:254–264. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.08.008.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner