Financial Incentives to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake and Decrease Disparities: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Beverly B Green, Melissa L Anderson, Andrea J Cook, Jessica Chubak, Sharon Fuller, Kilian J Kimbel, Jeffrey T Kullgren, Richard T Meenan, Sally W Vernon, Beverly B Green, Melissa L Anderson, Andrea J Cook, Jessica Chubak, Sharon Fuller, Kilian J Kimbel, Jeffrey T Kullgren, Richard T Meenan, Sally W Vernon

Abstract

Importance: Colorectal cancer screening rates are suboptimal, particularly among sociodemographically disadvantaged groups.

Objective: To examine whether guaranteed money or probabilistic lottery financial incentives conditional on completion of colorectal cancer screening increase screening uptake, particularly among groups with lower screening rates.

Design, setting, and participants: This parallel, 3-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 13, 2017, through April 12, 2018, at 21 medical centers in an integrated health care system in western Washington. A total of 838 age-eligible patients overdue for colorectal cancer screening who completed a questionnaire that confirmed eligibility and included sociodemographic and psychosocial questions were enrolled.

Interventions: Interventions were (1) mail only (n = 284; up to 3 mailings that included information on the importance of colorectal cancer screening and screening test choices, a fecal immunochemical test [FIT], and a reminder letter if necessary), (2) mail and monetary (n = 270; mailings plus guaranteed $10 on screening completion), or (3) mail and lottery (n = 284; mailings plus a 1 in 10 chance of receiving $50 on screening completion).

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was completion of any colorectal cancer screening within 6 months of randomization. Secondary outcomes were FIT or colonoscopy completion within 6 months of randomization. Intervention effects were compared across sociodemographic subgroups and self-reported psychosocial measures.

Results: A total of 838 participants (mean [SD] age, 59.7 [7.2] years; 546 [65.2%] female; 433 [52.2%] white race and 101 [12.1%] Hispanic ethnicity) were included in the study. Completion of any colorectal screening was not significantly higher for the mail and monetary group (207 of 270 [76.7%]) or the mail and lottery group (212 of 284 [74.6%]) than for the mail only group (203 of 284 [71.5%]) (P = .11). For FIT completion, interventions had a statistically significant effect (P = .04), with a net increase of 7.7% (95% CI, 0.3%-15.1%) in the mail and monetary group and 7.1% (95% CI, -0.2% to 14.3%) in the mail and lottery group compared with the mail only group. For patients with Medicaid insurance, the net increase compared with mail only in FIT completion for the mail and monetary or the mail and lottery group was 37.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-64.3%) (34.2% for the mail and monetary group and 40.4% for the mail and lottery group) compared with a net increase of only 5.6% (95% CI, -0.9% to 12.2%) among those not Medicaid insured (test for interaction P = .03).

Conclusions and relevance: Financial incentives increased FIT uptake but not overall colorectal cancer screening. Financial incentives may decrease screening disparities among some sociodemographically disadvantaged groups.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00697047.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors reported receiving grants from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health. Mr Kimbel reported receiving grants from the Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Kullgren reported receiving personal fees from Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, SeeChange Health, HealthMine, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, AbilTo Inc, Kansas City Area Life Sciences Institute, and American Diabetes Association; receiving support from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service; and being a Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service Career Development awardee at the Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Figures

Figure.. CONSORT Study Flow Diagram
Figure.. CONSORT Study Flow Diagram
CRC indicates colorectal cancer.

References

    1. White A, Thompson TD, White MC, et al. Cancer screening test use—United States, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66(8):201–206. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6608a1
    1. de Moor JS, Cohen RA, Shapiro JA, et al. Colorectal cancer screening in the United States: trends from 2008 to 2015 and variation by health insurance coverage. Prev Med. 2018;112:199–206. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.05.001
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2020. . Accessed May 23, 2019.
    1. Fedewa SA, Ma J, Sauer AG, et al. How many individuals will need to be screened to increase colorectal cancer screening prevalence to 80% by 2018? Cancer. 2015;121(23):4258–4265. doi:10.1002/cncr.29659
    1. Dougherty MK, Brenner AT, Crockett SD, et al. Evaluation of interventions intended to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178 (12):1645–1658. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4637
    1. Sabatino SA, Lawrence B, Elder R, et al.; Community Preventive Services Task Force. Effectiveness of interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers: nine updated systematic reviews for the guide to community preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(1):97–118. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.009
    1. Mehta SJ, Feingold J, Vandertuyn M, et al. Active choice and financial incentives to increase rates of screening colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology. 2017;153(5):1227–1229.e2. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.015
    1. Kullgren JT, Dicks TN, Fu X, et al. Financial incentives for completion of fecal occult blood tests among veterans: a 2-stage, pragmatic, cluster, randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(10)(suppl):S35–S43. doi:10.7326/M13-3015
    1. Gupta S, Miller S, Koch M, et al. Financial incentives for promoting colorectal cancer screening: a randomized, comparative effectiveness trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111(11):1630–1636. doi:10.1038/ajg.2016.286
    1. Slater JS, Parks MJ, Nelson CL, Hughes KD. The efficacy of direct mail, patient navigation, and incentives for increasing mammography and colonoscopy in the Medicaid population: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018;27(9):1047–1056. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-18-0038
    1. Mehta SJ, Pepe RS, Gabler NB, et al. Effect of financial incentives on patient use of mailed colorectal cancer screening tests: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(3):e191156. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1156
    1. Green BB, Wang CY, Anderson ML, et al. An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(5 Pt 1):301–311. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303050-00002
    1. McQueen A, Swank PR, Vernon SW. Examining patterns of association with defensive information processing about colorectal cancer screening. J Health Psychol. 2014;19(11):1443–1458. doi:10.1177/1359105313493649
    1. Green BB, BlueSpruce J, Tuzzio L, Vernon SW, Aubree Shay L, Catz SL. Reasons for never and intermittent completion of colorectal cancer screening after receiving multiple rounds of mailed fecal tests. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):531. doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4458-6
    1. Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up. March 15, 2017. . Accessed May 23, 2019.
    1. Equator Network. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. . Accessed May 23, 2019.
    1. Alexander G, Divine G, Couper M, et al. Incentives and mailing features aid in recruitment for an online health program. Am J Prev Med. 2017;34:382–388. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.028
    1. Green BB, Anderson ML, Chubak J, et al. Colorectal cancer screening rates increased after exposure to the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). J Am Board Fam Med. 2016;29(2):191–200. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2016.02.150290
    1. Coronado GD, Sanchez J, Petrik A, Kapka T, DeVoe J, Green B. Advantages of wordless instructions on how to complete a fecal immunochemical test: lessons from patient advisory council members of a federally qualified health center. J Cancer Educ. 2014;29(1):86–90. doi:10.1007/s13187-013-0551-4
    1. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005;43(11):1130–1139. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000182534.19832.83
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2016 BRFSS Survey Data and Documentation. 2016. . Accessed May 23, 2019.
    1. Vernon SW, Meissner H, Klabunde C, 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. Chew LD, Griffin JM, Partin MR, et al. Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(5):561–566. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0520-5
    1. McQueen A, Vernon SW, Rothman AJ, Norman GJ, Myers RE, Tilley BC. Examining the role of perceived susceptibility on colorectal cancer screening intention and behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2010;40(2):205–217. doi:10.1007/s12160-010-9215-3
    1. McQueen A, Tiro JA, Vernon SW. Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17(9): 2231–2237. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0176
    1. Tiro JA, Vernon SW, Hyslop T, Myers RE. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening among African Americans and Caucasians. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(12):2855–2861. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0217
    1. Ritvo P, Myers R, Del Giudice ML, et al. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening in Ontario, Canada: a replication study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17(11):3279–3283. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0241
    1. Murphy CC, McQueen A, Bartholomew LK, Del Junco DJ, Coan SP, Vernon SW. Factorial validity and invariance of four psychosocial constructs of colorectal cancer screening: does screening experience matter? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22(12):2295–2302. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0565
    1. Rawl S, Champion V, Menon U, Loehrer PJ, Vance GH, Skinner CS. Validation of scales to measure benefits of and barriers to colorectal cancer screening. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2008;19:47–63. doi:10.1300/J077v19n03_05
    1. Carver CS, Scheier MF. Dispositional optimism. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(6):293–299. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.003
    1. Strathman A, Gleicher F, Boninger DS, Edwards CS. The consideration of future consequences: weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;66:742–752. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742
    1. Green BB, Coronado GD, Devoe JE, Allison J. Navigating the murky waters of colorectal cancer screening and health reform. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(6):982–986. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.301877
    1. Dacus HLM, Wagner VL, Collins EA, et al. Evaluation of patient-focused interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among New York State Medicaid managed care patients. Cancer. 2018;124(21):4145–4153. doi:10.1002/cncr.31692

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj