Beverly B Green1,2,3, Melissa L Anderson2, Jessica Chubak2,4, Sharon Fuller2, Richard T Meenan5, Sally W Vernon6. 1. Group Health Permanente, Seattle, Washington. 2. Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington. 3. Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. 4. University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington. 5. Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon. 6. School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine the effect of continuing a centralized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) mailed program on screening adherence. METHODS: A patient-level randomized controlled trial was conducted in 21 patient-centered medical home primary care clinics between January 2010 and November 2012. A total of 2208 patients ranging in age from 52 to 75 years in a substudy of the Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-Up (SOS) trial were randomized at year 3 tocontinued automated interventions (Continued group), which included mailed information regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening choices, and were mailed stool kit tests or to a group in which interventions were stopped (Stopped group). The main outcomes and measures were the completion of CRC screening in year 3 and by subgroup characteristics, respectively. RESULTS:Adherence to CRC screening in year 3 was found to be significantly higher in patients in the Continued group compared with those in the Stopped group (53.3% vs 37.3%; adjusted net difference, 15.6% [P<.001]). This difference was entirely due to greater completion of FOBT (adjusted net difference, 18.0% [P<.001]). Year 3 CRC screening rates were highest in patients in the Continued group completing FOBT in both years 1 and 2 (77.2%), followed by patients completing only 1 FOBT in 1 of the 2 years (44.6%), with low rates of CRC testing reported among patients not completing any FOBT within the first 2 years (18.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A centralized mailed FOBT CRC screening program continued to be more effective than patient-centered medical home usual-care interventions, but only for those patients who had previously completed FOBT testing. Research is needed regarding how to engage patients not completing CRC testing after being mailed at least 2 rounds of FOBT tests. Cancer 2016;122:312-321.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine the effect of continuing a centralized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) mailed program on screening adherence. METHODS: A patient-level randomized controlled trial was conducted in 21 patient-centered medical home primary care clinics between January 2010 and November 2012. A total of 2208 patients ranging in age from 52 to 75 years in a substudy of the Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-Up (SOS) trial were randomized at year 3 to continued automated interventions (Continued group), which included mailed information regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening choices, and were mailed stool kit tests or to a group in which interventions were stopped (Stopped group). The main outcomes and measures were the completion of CRC screening in year 3 and by subgroup characteristics, respectively. RESULTS: Adherence to CRC screening in year 3 was found to be significantly higher in patients in the Continued group compared with those in the Stopped group (53.3% vs 37.3%; adjusted net difference, 15.6% [P<.001]). This difference was entirely due to greater completion of FOBT (adjusted net difference, 18.0% [P<.001]). Year 3 CRC screening rates were highest in patients in the Continued group completing FOBT in both years 1 and 2 (77.2%), followed by patients completing only 1 FOBT in 1 of the 2 years (44.6%), with low rates of CRC testing reported among patients not completing any FOBT within the first 2 years (18.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A centralized mailed FOBT CRC screening program continued to be more effective than patient-centered medical home usual-care interventions, but only for those patients who had previously completed FOBT testing. Research is needed regarding how to engage patients not completing CRC testing after being mailed at least 2 rounds of FOBT tests. Cancer 2016;122:312-321.
Authors: Atija Kapidzic; Elisabeth J Grobbee; Lieke Hol; Aafke Hc van Roon; Anneke J van Vuuren; Wolfert Spijker; Kirsten Izelaar; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ernst J Kuipers; Monique E van Leerdam Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Beverly B Green; Melissa L Anderson; Ching-Yun Wang; Sally W Vernon; Jessica Chubak; Richard T Meenan; Sharon Fuller Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2014 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: David W Baker; Tiffany Brown; David R Buchanan; Jordan Weil; Kate Balsley; Lauren Ranalli; Ji Young Lee; Kenzie A Cameron; M Rosario Ferreira; Quinn Stephens; Shira N Goldman; Alred Rademaker; Michael S Wolf Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Caitlin C Murphy; Sally W Vernon; Nicole M Haddock; Melissa L Anderson; Jessica Chubak; Beverly B Green Journal: Prev Med Date: 2014-06-15 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Akeem O Adebogun; Chyke A Doubeni; Luisel Ricks-Santi; Shelly McDonald-Pinkett; Patrick E Young; Brooks D Cash; Carrie N Klabunde Journal: Prev Med Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Amy Duncan; Deborah Turnbull; Carlene Wilson; Joanne M Osborne; Stephen R Cole; Ingrid Flight; Graeme P Young Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Beverly B Green; Melissa L Anderson; Andrea J Cook; Jessica Chubak; Sharon Fuller; Richard T Meenan; Sally W Vernon Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael K Dougherty; Alison T Brenner; Seth D Crockett; Shivani Gupta; Stephanie B Wheeler; Manny Coker-Schwimmer; Laura Cubillos; Teri Malo; Daniel S Reuland Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Carrie M Nielson; William M Vollmer; Amanda F Petrik; Erin M Keast; Beverly B Green; Gloria D Coronado Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Beverly B Green; June BlueSpruce; Leah Tuzzio; Sally W Vernon; L Aubree Shay; Sheryl L Catz Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Beverly B Green; Melissa L Anderson; Andrea J Cook; Jessica Chubak; Sharon Fuller; Richard T Meenan; Sally W Vernon Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 6.473