Cargando…

Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EB...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maxwell, Annette E., DeGroff, Amy, Hohl, Sarah D., Sharma, Krishna P., Sun, Juzhong, Escoffery, Cam, Hannon, Peggy A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35588522
http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd19.210258
_version_ 1784720402296078336
author Maxwell, Annette E.
DeGroff, Amy
Hohl, Sarah D.
Sharma, Krishna P.
Sun, Juzhong
Escoffery, Cam
Hannon, Peggy A.
author_facet Maxwell, Annette E.
DeGroff, Amy
Hohl, Sarah D.
Sharma, Krishna P.
Sun, Juzhong
Escoffery, Cam
Hannon, Peggy A.
author_sort Maxwell, Annette E.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs). This program provided an opportunity to assess the uptake of EBIs and SAs in 355 clinics that participated from 2015 to 2018. INTERVENTION APPROACH: The 30 funded awardees of CRCCP partnered with clinics to implement at least 2 of 4 EBIs that CDC prioritized (patient reminders, provider reminders, reducing structural barriers, provider assessment and feedback) and 4 optional strategies that CDC identified as SAs (small media, professional development and provider education, patient navigation, and community health workers). EVALUATION METHODS: Clinics completed 3 annual surveys to report uptake, implementation, and integration and perceived sustainability of the priority EBIs and SAs. RESULTS: In our sample of 355 clinics, uptake of 4 EBIs and 2 SAs significantly increased over time. By year 3, 82% of clinics implemented patient reminder systems, 88% implemented provider reminder systems, 82% implemented provider assessment and feedback, 76% implemented activities to reduce structural barriers, 51% implemented provider education, and 84% used small media. Most clinics that implemented these strategies (>90%) considered them fully integrated into the health system or clinic operations and sustainable by year 3. Fewer clinics used patient navigation (30%) and community health workers (19%), with no increase over the years of the study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Clinics participating in the CRCCP reported high uptake and perceived sustainability of EBIs that can be integrated into electronic medical record systems but limited uptake of patient navigation and community health workers, which are uniquely suited to reduce cancer disparities. Future research should determine how to promote uptake and assess cost-effectiveness of CRCCP interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9165474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91654742022-06-07 Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018 Maxwell, Annette E. DeGroff, Amy Hohl, Sarah D. Sharma, Krishna P. Sun, Juzhong Escoffery, Cam Hannon, Peggy A. Prev Chronic Dis Implementation Evaluation PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs). This program provided an opportunity to assess the uptake of EBIs and SAs in 355 clinics that participated from 2015 to 2018. INTERVENTION APPROACH: The 30 funded awardees of CRCCP partnered with clinics to implement at least 2 of 4 EBIs that CDC prioritized (patient reminders, provider reminders, reducing structural barriers, provider assessment and feedback) and 4 optional strategies that CDC identified as SAs (small media, professional development and provider education, patient navigation, and community health workers). EVALUATION METHODS: Clinics completed 3 annual surveys to report uptake, implementation, and integration and perceived sustainability of the priority EBIs and SAs. RESULTS: In our sample of 355 clinics, uptake of 4 EBIs and 2 SAs significantly increased over time. By year 3, 82% of clinics implemented patient reminder systems, 88% implemented provider reminder systems, 82% implemented provider assessment and feedback, 76% implemented activities to reduce structural barriers, 51% implemented provider education, and 84% used small media. Most clinics that implemented these strategies (>90%) considered them fully integrated into the health system or clinic operations and sustainable by year 3. Fewer clinics used patient navigation (30%) and community health workers (19%), with no increase over the years of the study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Clinics participating in the CRCCP reported high uptake and perceived sustainability of EBIs that can be integrated into electronic medical record systems but limited uptake of patient navigation and community health workers, which are uniquely suited to reduce cancer disparities. Future research should determine how to promote uptake and assess cost-effectiveness of CRCCP interventions. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2022-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9165474/ /pubmed/35588522 http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd19.210258 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Preventing Chronic Disease is a publication of the U.S. Government. This publication is in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from this work may be reprinted freely. Use of these materials should be properly cited.
spellingShingle Implementation Evaluation
Maxwell, Annette E.
DeGroff, Amy
Hohl, Sarah D.
Sharma, Krishna P.
Sun, Juzhong
Escoffery, Cam
Hannon, Peggy A.
Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title_full Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title_fullStr Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title_short Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015–2018
title_sort evaluating uptake of evidence-based interventions in 355 clinics partnering with the colorectal cancer control program, 2015–2018
topic Implementation Evaluation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35588522
http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd19.210258
work_keys_str_mv AT maxwellannettee evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT degroffamy evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT hohlsarahd evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT sharmakrishnap evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT sunjuzhong evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT escofferycam evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018
AT hannonpeggya evaluatinguptakeofevidencebasedinterventionsin355clinicspartneringwiththecolorectalcancercontrolprogram20152018