BACKGROUND: There is a need for controlled studies to assess the impact of patient navigation in vulnerable cancer populations. METHODS:Boston Patient Navigation Research Program conducted a quasi-experimental patient navigation interventionacross six federally qualified inner-city community health centers, three assigned to a breast cancer navigation intervention and three assigned to a cervical cancer navigation intervention; each group then served as the control for the other. Eligible women had an abnormal breast or cervical cancer screening test conducted at one of the participating health centers during a baseline (2004-2005) or intervention period (2007-2008). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and proportional hazards regression examined the effect of patient navigation on time to definitive diagnosis, adjusting for covariates, clustering by clinic and differences between the baseline and intervention period. RESULTS:We enrolled 997 subjects in the baseline period and 3,041 subjects during the intervention period, of whom 1,497 were in the navigated arm, and 1,544 in the control arm. There was a significant decrease in time to diagnosis for subjects in the navigated group compared with controls among those with a cervical screening abnormality [aHR 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-1.9]; and among those with a breast cancer screening abnormality that resolved after 60 days (aHR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9), with no differences before 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study documents a benefit of patient navigation on time to diagnosis among a racially/ethnically diverse inner city population. IMPACT: Patient navigation may address cancer health disparities by reducing time to diagnosis following an abnormal cancer-screening event. 2012AACR
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: There is a need for controlled studies to assess the impact of patient navigation in vulnerable cancer populations. METHODS: Boston Patient Navigation Research Program conducted a quasi-experimental patient navigation intervention across six federally qualified inner-city community health centers, three assigned to a breast cancer navigation intervention and three assigned to a cervical cancer navigation intervention; each group then served as the control for the other. Eligible women had an abnormal breast or cervical cancer screening test conducted at one of the participating health centers during a baseline (2004-2005) or intervention period (2007-2008). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and proportional hazards regression examined the effect of patient navigation on time to definitive diagnosis, adjusting for covariates, clustering by clinic and differences between the baseline and intervention period. RESULTS: We enrolled 997 subjects in the baseline period and 3,041 subjects during the intervention period, of whom 1,497 were in the navigated arm, and 1,544 in the control arm. There was a significant decrease in time to diagnosis for subjects in the navigated group compared with controls among those with a cervical screening abnormality [aHR 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-1.9]; and among those with a breast cancer screening abnormality that resolved after 60 days (aHR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9), with no differences before 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study documents a benefit of patient navigation on time to diagnosis among a racially/ethnically diverse inner city population. IMPACT: Patient navigation may address cancer health disparities by reducing time to diagnosis following an abnormal cancer-screening event. 2012 AACR
Authors: R G Roetzheim; N Pal; C Tennant; L Voti; J Z Ayanian; A Schwabe; J P Krischer Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-08-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Tracy A Battaglia; Linda Burhansstipanov; Samantha S Murrell; Andrea J Dwyer; Sarah E Caron Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kristen J Wells; Tracy A Battaglia; Donald J Dudley; Roland Garcia; Amanda Greene; Elizabeth Calhoun; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Electra D Paskett; Peter C Raich Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Tracy A Battaglia; Julie S Darnell; Naomi Ko; Fred Snyder; Electra D Paskett; Kristen J Wells; Elizabeth M Whitley; Jennifer J Griggs; Anand Karnad; Heather Young; Victoria Warren-Mears; Melissa A Simon; Elizabeth Calhoun Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Alok Kapoor; Tracy A Battaglia; Alexis P Isabelle; Amresh D Hanchate; Richard L Kalish; Sharon Bak; Rebecca G Mishuris; Swati M Shroff; Karen M Freund Journal: J Health Care Poor Underserved Date: 2014-02
Authors: Ambili Ramachandran; Frederick R Snyder; Mira L Katz; Julie S Darnell; Donald J Dudley; Steven R Patierno; Mechelle R Sanders; Patricia A Valverde; Melissa A Simon; Victoria Warren-Mears; Tracy A Battaglia Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Mira L Katz; Gregory S Young; Paul L Reiter; Tracy A Battaglia; Kristen J Wells; Mechelle Sanders; Melissa Simon; Donald J Dudley; Steven R Patierno; Electra D Paskett Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2014 Jan-Feb
Authors: Ashley Meilleur; S V Subramanian; Jesse J Plascak; James L Fisher; Electra D Paskett; Elizabeth B Lamont Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Richard B Warnecke; Richard T Campbell; Ganga Vijayasiri; Richard E Barrett; Garth H Rauscher Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Karen M Freund; Tracy A Battaglia; Elizabeth Calhoun; Julie S Darnell; Donald J Dudley; Kevin Fiscella; Martha L Hare; Nancy LaVerda; Ji-Hyun Lee; Paul Levine; David M Murray; Steven R Patierno; Peter C Raich; Richard G Roetzheim; Melissa Simon; Frederick R Snyder; Victoria Warren-Mears; Elizabeth M Whitley; Paul Winters; Gregory S Young; Electra D Paskett Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Anne Elizabeth Glassgow; Yamile Molina; Sage Kim; Richard T Campbell; Julie Darnell; Elizabeth A Calhoun Journal: Health Promot Pract Date: 2018-06-15