Shivan J Mehta1, Christopher D Jensen2, Virginia P Quinn3, Joanne E Schottinger3, Ann G Zauber4, Reinier Meester5, Adeyinka O Laiyemo6, Stacey Fedewa7,8, Michael Goodman8, Robert H Fletcher9, Theodore R Levin2, Douglas A Corley2, Chyke A Doubeni10. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA, USA. 3. Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, CA, USA. 4. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Erasmus University Medical Center (Erasmus MC), Rotterdam, Netherlands. 6. Division of Gastroenterology, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA. 7. Surveillance and Health Services Research, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA. 8. Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 9. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 10. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, Gates 2 Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. chyke.doubeni@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening outreach programs using population health management principles offer services uniformly to all eligible persons, but racial/ethnic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening patterns in such programs are not well known. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between race/ethnicity and the receipt of CRC screening and timely follow-up of positive results before and after implementation of a screening program. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of screen-eligible individuals at the Kaiser Permanente Northern California community-based integrated healthcare delivery system (2004-2013). SUBJECTS: A total of 868,934 screen-eligible individuals 51-74 years of age at cohort entry, which included 662,872 persons in the period before program implementation (2004-2006), 654,633 during the first 3 years after implementation (2007-2009), and 665,268 in the period from 4 to 7 years (2010-2013) after program implementation. INTERVENTION: A comprehensive system-wide long-term effort to increase CRC that included leadership alignment, goal-setting, and quality assurance through a PHM approach, using mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) along with offering screening at office visits. MAIN MEASURES: Differences over time and by race/ethnicity in up-to-date CRC screening (overall and by test type) and timely follow-up of a positive screen. Race/ethnicity categories included non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American, and multiple races. KEY RESULTS: From 2004 to 2013, age/sex-adjusted CRC screening rates increased in all groups, including 35.2 to 81.1 % among whites and 35.6 to 78.0 % among blacks. Screening rates among Hispanics (33.1 to 78.3 %) and Native Americans (29.4 to 74.5 %) remained lower than those for whites both before and after program implementation. Blacks, who had slightly higher rates before program implementation (adjusted rate ratio [RR] = 1.04, 99 % CI: 1.02-1.05), had lower rates after program implementation (RR for period from 4 to 7 years = 0.97, 99 % CI: 0.96-0.97). There were also substantial improvements in timely follow-up of positive screening results. CONCLUSIONS: In this screening program using core PHM principles, CRC screening increased markedly in all racial/ethnic groups, but disparities persisted for some groups and developed in others, which correlated with levels of adoption of mailed FIT.
BACKGROUND: Screening outreach programs using population health management principles offer services uniformly to all eligible persons, but racial/ethnic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening patterns in such programs are not well known. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between race/ethnicity and the receipt of CRC screening and timely follow-up of positive results before and after implementation of a screening program. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of screen-eligible individuals at the Kaiser Permanente Northern California community-based integrated healthcare delivery system (2004-2013). SUBJECTS: A total of 868,934 screen-eligible individuals 51-74 years of age at cohort entry, which included 662,872 persons in the period before program implementation (2004-2006), 654,633 during the first 3 years after implementation (2007-2009), and 665,268 in the period from 4 to 7 years (2010-2013) after program implementation. INTERVENTION: A comprehensive system-wide long-term effort to increase CRC that included leadership alignment, goal-setting, and quality assurance through a PHM approach, using mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) along with offering screening at office visits. MAIN MEASURES: Differences over time and by race/ethnicity in up-to-date CRC screening (overall and by test type) and timely follow-up of a positive screen. Race/ethnicity categories included non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American, and multiple races. KEY RESULTS: From 2004 to 2013, age/sex-adjusted CRC screening rates increased in all groups, including 35.2 to 81.1 % among whites and 35.6 to 78.0 % among blacks. Screening rates among Hispanics (33.1 to 78.3 %) and Native Americans (29.4 to 74.5 %) remained lower than those for whites both before and after program implementation. Blacks, who had slightly higher rates before program implementation (adjusted rate ratio [RR] = 1.04, 99 % CI: 1.02-1.05), had lower rates after program implementation (RR for period from 4 to 7 years = 0.97, 99 % CI: 0.96-0.97). There were also substantial improvements in timely follow-up of positive screening results. CONCLUSIONS: In this screening program using core PHM principles, CRC screening increased markedly in all racial/ethnic groups, but disparities persisted for some groups and developed in others, which correlated with levels of adoption of mailed FIT.
Entities:
Keywords:
cancer screening; colorectal cancer; health care delivery; population health; race & ethnicity
Authors: Karen E Lasser; Jennifer Murillo; Sandra Lisboa; A Naomie Casimir; Lisa Valley-Shah; Karen M Emmons; Robert H Fletcher; John Z Ayanian Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2011-05-23
Authors: Jasmin A Tiro; Aruna Kamineni; Theodore R Levin; Yingye Zheng; Joanne S Schottinger; Carolyn M Rutter; Douglas A Corley; Celette S Skinner; Jessica Chubak; Chyke A Doubeni; Ethan A Halm; Samir Gupta; Karen J Wernli; Carrie Klabunde Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Christian von Wagner; Gianluca Baio; Rosalind Raine; Julia Snowball; Stephen Morris; Wendy Atkin; Austin Obichere; Graham Handley; Richard F Logan; Sandra Rainbow; Stephen Smith; Stephen Halloran; Jane Wardle Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Stacey A Fedewa; Douglas A Corley; Christopher D Jensen; Wei Zhao; Michael Goodman; Ahmedin Jemal; Kevin C Ward; Theodore R Levin; Chyke A Doubeni Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 5.043
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: Elisabeth F P Peterse; Reinier G S Meester; Andrea Gini; Chyke A Doubeni; Daniel S Anderson; Franklin G Berger; Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Devon K Check; Kathleen B Albers; Kanti M Uppal; Jennifer Marie Suga; Alyce S Adams; Laurel A Habel; Charles P Quesenberry; Lori C Sakoda Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Shivan J Mehta; Tanya Khan; Carmen Guerra; Catherine Reitz; Timothy McAuliffe; Kevin G Volpp; David A Asch; Chyke A Doubeni Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Amanda F Petrik; Thuy Le; Erin Keast; Jennifer Rivelli; Keshia Bigler; Beverly Green; William M Vollmer; Gloria Coronado Journal: J Community Health Date: 2018-02