Mark Lazenby1, Elizabeth Ercolano1, Hui Tan1, Leah Ferrucci2, Terry Badger3, Marcia Grant4, Paul Jacobsen5, Ruth McCorkle1. 1. Yale University School of Nursing, Orange, Connecticut. 2. Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut. 3. College of Nursing, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. 4. City of Hope, San Dimas, California. 5. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the RE-AIM framework's effect on retention of participants and implementation outcomes of a 5-year cancer research education programme on psychosocial distress screening in cancer centres across the United States. METHODS: A one-group pre-/post-test design was used to evaluate the programme on participant retention and implementation outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months after enrolling in the programme (baseline) and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Seventy-two cancer centres participated in four cohorts. Participant retention was 100%. At baseline and 24 months, respectively, 52 (72%) and 64 (88%) of the cancer centres had formulated a psychosocial distress screening policy; 51 (71%) and 70 (98%) had started screening in more than one clinic/population; 15 (21%) and 45 (63%) had started auditing health records for documentation of screening. Each outcome rate improved at the cancer-centre level over the 24 months. CONCLUSION: RE-AIM can be used as a framework for cancer research education programmes. Future research is needed on the use of a randomised adaptive design to test the optimal support for implementation of quality care standards according to cancer centres' needs.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the RE-AIM framework's effect on retention of participants and implementation outcomes of a 5-year cancer research education programme on psychosocial distress screening in cancer centres across the United States. METHODS: A one-group pre-/post-test design was used to evaluate the programme on participant retention and implementation outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months after enrolling in the programme (baseline) and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Seventy-two cancer centres participated in four cohorts. Participant retention was 100%. At baseline and 24 months, respectively, 52 (72%) and 64 (88%) of the cancer centres had formulated a psychosocial distress screening policy; 51 (71%) and 70 (98%) had started screening in more than one clinic/population; 15 (21%) and 45 (63%) had started auditing health records for documentation of screening. Each outcome rate improved at the cancer-centre level over the 24 months. CONCLUSION: RE-AIM can be used as a framework for cancer research education programmes. Future research is needed on the use of a randomised adaptive design to test the optimal support for implementation of quality care standards according to cancer centres' needs.
Authors: Russell E Glasgow; Cynthia Vinson; David Chambers; Muin J Khoury; Robert M Kaplan; Christine Hunter Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Mark Lazenby; Elizabeth Ercolano; Andrea Knies; Nick Pasacreta; Marcia Grant; Jimmie C Holland; Paul B Jacobsen; Terry Badger; Devika R Jutagir; Ruth McCorkle Journal: Clin J Oncol Nurs Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 1.027