Chelsea B Deroche1, Suzanne W McDermott2, Joshua R Mann3, James W Hardin2. 1. Department of Health Management and Informatics, Biostatistics and Research Design Unit, University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, Missouri. Electronic address: derochec@health.missouri.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of South Carolina Arnold School of Public Health, Columbia, South Carolina. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the U.S.; however, if the population aged 50 years or older received routine screening, approximately 60% of these deaths could be eliminated. This study investigates whether adults, aged 50-75 years, with one of three disabilities (blind/low vision [BLV], intellectual disability [ID], spinal cord injury [SCI]) receive CRC screening at rates equivalent to adults without the three disabilities, by accounting for combinations of recommended CRC screenings during a 10-year period (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, fecal occult blood test). METHODS: South Carolina Medicaid and Medicare, State Health Plan, and hospital discharge data (2000-2009) were analyzed (2013-2015) to estimate the proportion of adherence to and adjusted odds of CRC screening over time among adults with one of the three disabilities, BLV, ID, or SCI, versus adults without these conditions. RESULTS: The estimated proportion of adults who adhere to changing recommendations over time was lower for adults with ID (34.32%) or SCI (44.14%) compared with those without these disabilities (48.48%). All three case groups had significantly lower AORs of adherence versus those without (BLV: AOR=0.88, 95% CI=0.80, 0.96; ID: AOR=0.55, 95% CI=0.52, 0.59; SCI: AOR=0.88, 95% CI=0.82, 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, adults with BLV, ID, or SCI were less likely to receive and adhere to CRC screening recommendations than those without these disabilities. This method provides a thorough evaluation of adherence to CRC screening by considering levels of adherence during each month of Medicaid or Medicare coverage.
INTRODUCTION:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the U.S.; however, if the population aged 50 years or older received routine screening, approximately 60% of these deaths could be eliminated. This study investigates whether adults, aged 50-75 years, with one of three disabilities (blind/low vision [BLV], intellectual disability [ID], spinal cord injury [SCI]) receive CRC screening at rates equivalent to adults without the three disabilities, by accounting for combinations of recommended CRC screenings during a 10-year period (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, fecal occult blood test). METHODS: South Carolina Medicaid and Medicare, State Health Plan, and hospital discharge data (2000-2009) were analyzed (2013-2015) to estimate the proportion of adherence to and adjusted odds of CRC screening over time among adults with one of the three disabilities, BLV, ID, or SCI, versus adults without these conditions. RESULTS: The estimated proportion of adults who adhere to changing recommendations over time was lower for adults with ID (34.32%) or SCI (44.14%) compared with those without these disabilities (48.48%). All three case groups had significantly lower AORs of adherence versus those without (BLV: AOR=0.88, 95% CI=0.80, 0.96; ID: AOR=0.55, 95% CI=0.52, 0.59; SCI: AOR=0.88, 95% CI=0.82, 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, adults with BLV, ID, or SCI were less likely to receive and adhere to CRC screening recommendations than those without these disabilities. This method provides a thorough evaluation of adherence to CRC screening by considering levels of adherence during each month of Medicaid or Medicare coverage.
Authors: Jonathan S Slater; Michael J Parks; Christina L Nelson; Kelly D Hughes Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2018-06-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Dong Wook Shin; Dongkyung Chang; Jin Hyung Jung; Kyungdo Han; So Young Kim; Kui Son Choi; Won Chul Lee; Jong Heon Park; Jong Hyock Park Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Lama Assi; Varshini Varadaraj; Ahmed F Shakarchi; Orla C Sheehan; Nicholas S Reed; Joshua R Ehrlich; Bonnielin K Swenor Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Peter J Mazzone; Gerard A Silvestri; Lesley H Souter; Tanner J Caverly; Jeffrey P Kanne; Hormuzd A Katki; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Frank C Detterbeck Journal: Chest Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Peter J Mazzone; Gerard A Silvestri; Lesley H Souter; Tanner J Caverly; Jeffrey P Kanne; Hormuzd A Katki; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Frank C Detterbeck Journal: Chest Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 9.410