Literature DB >> 22641790

The FLU-FOBT Program in community clinics: durable benefits of a randomized controlled trial.

Judith M E Walsh1, Ginny Gildengorin, Lawrence W Green, Jason Jenkins, Michael B Potter.   

Abstract

The objective of the study was to determine the extent to which the FLU-FOBT Program, a colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) intervention linking the provision of fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) to the time of annual influenza vaccination, resulted in practice changes in six primary care clinics 1 year after it was introduced in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We assessed CRCS rate changes for influenza vaccine recipients, administered brief serial clinic staff surveys and interviewed clinic leaders 1 year after the RCT. CRCS rates for influenza vaccination recipients between the ages of 50 and 75 years were 42.5% before the RCT, 54.5% immediately after the RCT and 55.8% 1 year after the RCT (P < 0.001 for difference between baseline and 1 year after RCT). Many FLU-FOBT Program components were maintained in most clinics at 1-year follow-up. Only 63% of clinic staff survey respondents (26 of 41) continued offering FOBT with influenza vaccines, but 85% (35 of 41) continued to provide mailing kits with FOBT. Many patient education materials were maintained and staff satisfaction with the intervention remained high. Clinic leaders acknowledged barriers to maintenance but also observed several beneficial practice changes. Many components of the FLU-FOBT Program were maintained, with beneficial outcomes for participating practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22641790      PMCID: PMC3442378          DOI: 10.1093/her/cys063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Educ Res        ISSN: 0268-1153


  9 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.

Authors:  R E Glasgow; T M Vogt; S M Boles
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Lessons learned from community-based cancer screening intervention research.

Authors:  Rena J Pasick; Robert A Hiatt; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Evelyn P Whitlock; Jennifer S Lin; Elizabeth Liles; Tracy L Beil; Rongwei Fu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Making evidence from research more relevant, useful, and actionable in policy, program planning, and practice slips "twixt cup and lip".

Authors:  Lawrence W Green; Russell E Glasgow; David Atkins; Kurt Stange
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 5.043

6.  Adaptation of the FLU-FOBT Program for a primary care clinic serving a low-income Chinese American community: new evidence of effectiveness.

Authors:  Michael B Potter; Tina M Yu; Ginny Gildengorin; Albert Y Yu; Kit Chan; Stephen J McPhee; Lawrence W Green; Judith M Walsh
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2011-02

7.  The effectiveness of the FLU-FOBT program in primary care a randomized trial.

Authors:  Michael B Potter; Judith M E Walsh; Tina M Yu; Ginny Gildengorin; Lawrence W Green; Stephen J McPhee
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 5.043

8.  Offering annual fecal occult blood tests at annual flu shot clinics increases colorectal cancer screening rates.

Authors:  Michael B Potter; La Phengrasamy; Esther S Hudes; Stephen J McPhee; Judith M E Walsh
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

9.  Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Amy B Knudsen; Janneke Wilschut; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Outreach and Inreach Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Latinos at a Federally Qualified Health Center: A Randomized Controlled Trial, 2015-2018.

Authors:  Sheila F Castañeda; Balambal Bharti; Marielena Rojas; Silvia Mercado; Adriana M Bearse; Jasmine Camacho; Manuel Song Lopez; Fatima Muñoz; Shawne O'Connell; Lin Liu; Gregory A Talavera; Samir Gupta
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community.

Authors:  Roger E Thomas; Diane L Lorenzetti
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-07-07

3.  An innovative strategy to reach the underserved for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Katherine Josa Briant; Noah Espinoza; Avigail Galvan; Elizabeth Carosso; Nathan Marchello; Sandra Linde; Wade Copeland; Beti Thompson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 4.  Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community.

Authors:  Roger E Thomas; Diane L Lorenzetti
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-30

Review 5.  Population screening for colorectal cancer means getting FIT: the past, present, and future of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT).

Authors:  James E Allison; Callum G Fraser; Stephen P Halloran; Graeme P Young
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 4.519

6.  Evaluating the sustainability of a cancer screening intervention through a PRISM: The PreView experience.

Authors:  Judith Walsh; Michael Potter; Elizabeth Ozer; Ginny Gildengorin; Natasha Dass; Lawrence Green
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2021-06-10
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.