Assessing the effectiveness of a community health advisor plus screen to save educational intervention on stool-based testing adherence in an African American safety net clinic population: study protocol for a randomized pragmatic trial

John S Luque, Olayemi O Matthew, Deloria R Jackson, Matthew A Vargas, Tifini Austin, Askal Ali, Gebre E Kiros, Cynthia M Harris, Rima Tawk, Clement K Gwede, Kristin Wallace, Pascal Jean-Pierre, John S Luque, Olayemi O Matthew, Deloria R Jackson, Matthew A Vargas, Tifini Austin, Askal Ali, Gebre E Kiros, Cynthia M Harris, Rima Tawk, Clement K Gwede, Kristin Wallace, Pascal Jean-Pierre

Abstract

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most deadly cancer affecting US adults and is also one of the most treatable cancers when detected at an earlier clinical stage of disease through screening. CRC health disparities experienced by African Americans are due in part to the later stage of diagnosis, suggesting the importance of improving African Americans' CRC screening participation. The national Screen to Save (S2S) initiative employs a community health educator to deliver CRC screening education which can be tailored for specific populations, and such approaches have increased CRC screening rates in disadvantaged and racial/ethnic minority populations.

Methods/design: In this trial emphasizing stool-based CRC screening, focus groups informed the development of an adapted S2S video and brochure tailored for African Americans and identified preferred motivational text messages for a multicomponent community health advisor (CHA) intervention. A CHA hired from the community was trained to deliver a 6-week CRC educational intervention consisting of an initial face-to-face meeting followed by 5 weeks of calls and texts. Interested eligible persons are enrolled primarily through recruitment by two partnering community health centers (CHCs) and secondarily through various outreach channels and, after consenting and completing a baseline survey, are randomly assigned to one of two study arms. The CHCs are blinded to study arm assignment. Intervention arm participants receive the brochure and CHA intervention while participants assigned to the control group receive only the brochure. All participants receive a stool-based CRC screening test from their health center, and the primary outcome is the completion of the screening test at 12 months. Secondary objectives are to estimate the effect of the intervention on mediating factors, explore the effect of moderating factors, and perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the CHA intervention.

Discussion: The TUNE-UP study will enhance understanding about CRC screening in African Americans obtaining primary health care through CHCs and is one of the very few studies to examine a CHA intervention in this context. A better understanding of the mechanisms by which the intervention affects patient beliefs and behaviors will help focus future research while the exploratory cost-effectiveness analysis will inform CHCs' decision-making about implementing a CHA program to increase screening and reduce cancer health disparities.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04304001 . Registered on March 11, 2020.

Keywords: African Americans; Cancer prevention; Colorectal cancer screening; Randomized controlled trial; Screening.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of the intervention trial
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schedule of enrollment, interventions, and assessments
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Conceptual model for TUNE-UP project
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Path diagram for mediation models

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(1):7–33. doi: 10.3322/caac.21654.
    1. DeSantis CE, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(3):211–233. doi: 10.3322/caac.21555.
    1. Joseph DA, King JB, Dowling NF, Thomas CC, Richardson LC. Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening test use - United States, 2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(10):253–259. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6910a1.
    1. Carethers JM. Clinical and genetic factors to inform reducing colorectal cancer disparities in African Americans. Front Oncol. 2018;8:531. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00531.
    1. DeGroff A, Coa K, Morrissey KG, Rohan E, Slotman B. Key considerations in designing a patient navigation program for colorectal cancer screening. Health Promot Pract. 2014;15(4):483–495. doi: 10.1177/1524839913513587.
    1. U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, Cabana M, Caughey AB, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021;325(19):1965–1977. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.6238.
    1. Wolf AMD, Fontham ETH, Church TR, Flowers CR, Guerra CE, LaMonte SJ, et al. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(4):250–281. doi: 10.3322/caac.21457.
    1. Cusumano VT, May FP. Making FIT count: maximizing appropriate use of the fecal immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening programs. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35(6):1870–1874. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-05728-y.
    1. Gwede CK, Davis SN, Quinn GP, Koskan AM, Ealey J, Abdulla R, et al. Making it work: health care provider perspectives on strategies to increase colorectal cancer screening in federally qualified health centers. J Cancer Educ. 2013;28(4):777–783. doi: 10.1007/s13187-013-0531-8.
    1. The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology USPSTF recommends expansion of colorectal cancer screening. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;6(1):1. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30361-7.
    1. Lin JS, Perdue LA, Henrikson NB, Bean SI, Blasi PR. Screening for colorectal cancer: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2021;325(19):1978–1997. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.4417.
    1. Ebner DW, Kisiel JB. Stool-based tests for colorectal cancer screening: performance benchmarks lead to high expected efficacy. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2020;22(7):32. doi: 10.1007/s11894-020-00770-6.
    1. Attipoe-Dorcoo S, Chattopadhyay SK, Verughese J, Ekwueme DU, Sabatino SA, Peng Y, Community Preventive Services Task Force Engaging community health workers to increase cancer screening: a community guide systematic economic review. Am J Prev Med. 2021;60(4):e189–e197. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.08.011.
    1. Escoffery C, Fernandez ME, Vernon SW, Liang S, Maxwell AE, Allen JD, et al. Patient navigation in a colorectal cancer screening program. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2015;21(5):433–440. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000132.
    1. Santos SL, Tagai EK, Scheirer MA, Bowie J, Haider M, Slade J. Adoption, reach, and implementation of a cancer education intervention in African American churches. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0566-z.
    1. National Ceancer Institute . Screen to Save: NCI colorectal cancer outreach and screening initiative. 2021.
    1. Whitaker DE, Snyder FR, San Miguel-Majors SL, Bailey LO, Springfield SA. Screen to Save: results from NCI’s colorectal cancer outreach and screening initiative to promote awareness and knowledge of colorectal cancer in racial/ethnic and rural populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29(5):910–917. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0972.
    1. Boutsicaris AS, Fisher JL, Gray DM, Adeyanju T, Holland JS, Paskett ED. Changes in colorectal cancer knowledge and screening intention among Ohio African American and Appalachian participants: the screen to save initiative. Cancer Causes Control. 2021;32(10):1149–1159. doi: 10.1007/s10552-021-01462-w.
    1. Glanz K, Bishop DB. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:399–418. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103604.
    1. Kiviniemi MT, Bennett A, Zaiter M, Marshall JR. Individual-level factors in colorectal cancer screening: a review of the literature on the relation of individual-level health behavior constructs and screening behavior. Psychooncology. 2011;20(10):1023–1033. doi: 10.1002/pon.1865.
    1. Thompson VL, Bugbee A, Meriac JP, Harris JK. The utility of cancer-related cultural constructs to understand colorectal cancer screening among African Americans. J Public Health Res. 2013;2(2):e11. doi: 10.4081/jphr.2013.e11.
    1. Guide to Community Preventive Services . The community guide. 2021.
    1. Vernon SW, Meissner H, Klabunde C, Rimer BK, Ahnen DJ, Bastani R, et al. Measures for ascertaining use of colorectal cancer screening in behavioral, health services, and epidemiologic research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13(6):898–905.
    1. Naylor K, Ward J, Polite BN. Interventions to improve care related to colorectal cancer among racial and ethnic minorities: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(8):1033–1046. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2044-2.
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.
    1. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173–1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
    1. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015.
    1. Frick KD. Microcosting quantity data collection methods. Med Care. 2009;47(7 Suppl 1):S76–S81. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819bc064.
    1. Myers RE, Sifri R, Daskalakis C, DiCarlo M, Geethakumari PR, Cocroft J. Increasing colon cancer screening in primary care among African Americans. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(12):dju344. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju344.
    1. Lairson DR, Kim J, Byrd T, Salaiz R, Shokar NK. Cost-effectiveness of community interventions for colorectal cancer screening: low-income Hispanic population. Health Promot Pract. 2018;19(6):863–872. doi: 10.1177/1524839917750815.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する