Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Maxwell AE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4927441 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Implementation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community organizations: a cluster randomized trial.
Maxwell Annette E AE Danao Leda L LL Cayetano Reggie T RT Crespi Catherine M CM Bastani Roshan R
Translational behavioral medicine 20160601 2
<h4>Unlabelled</h4>The implementation of evidence-based strategies to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains challenging. The aim of this study is to evaluate two strategies to implement an evidence-based intervention to promote CRC screening in Filipino American community organizations. Twenty-two community organizations were randomized to either a basic or enhanced implementation strategy. In both arms, community health advisors recruited participants non-adherent to CRC screening g ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Filipino Americans have low rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and high CRC mortality. To reduce this disparity, we conducted a dissemination trial in which we offered two levels of technical assistance to community organizations to disseminate an evidence-based CRC screening promotion program among their Filipino American members. This report describes the recruitment of organizations and adoption - the proportion and representativeness of organizations that decided to implement the program.During the recruitment phase, we completed organizational assessments with 44 community-based organizations (previous partners in research, organizations that were referred to us, or new organizations) to assess their eligibility to participate (having?150 Filipino American members age 50+). We compared organizational characteristics of organizations that did and did not adopt our CRC screening promotion program.Twenty two of the 44 community organizations that completed the assessment adopted the CRC screening promotion program (50%). Adoption was highest among organizations that had previously partnered with us (11/14=79%) and among organizations that were referred to us by community partners (5/10=50%) and lowest among new organizations (6/20=30%). Few organizational differences were found between adopters and non-adopters.The high rate of adoption among organizations that were referred by community partners or had partnered with us in the past underscores the importance of community resources, community-academic relationships, and partnership in the dissemination process. However, the moderate rate of adoption among new organizations and the demands of completing documentation and assessments in our trial to advance dissemination research raise questions regarding the generalizability of study findings.
| S-EPMC3995646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdoption of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has lagged in community health center (CHC) populations in the USA. To address this implementation gap, we developed a multilevel intervention to improve screening in CHCs in our region. We used the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to guide this effort. Here, we describe the use of implementation strategies outlined in the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation in both the Exploration and Preparation phases of this project. During these two EPIS phases, we aimed to answer three primary questions: (1) What factors in the inner and outer contexts may support or hinder colorectal cancer screening in North Carolina CHCs?; (2) What evidence-based practices (EBPs) best fit the needs of North Carolina CHCs?; and (3) How can we best integrate the selected EBPs into North Carolina CHC systems?MethodsDuring the Exploration phase, we conducted local needs assessments, built a coalition, and conducted local consensus discussions. In the Preparation phase, we formed workgroups corresponding to the intervention's core functional components. Workgroups used cyclical small tests of change and process mapping to identify implementation barriers and facilitators and to adapt intervention components to fit inner and outer contexts.ResultsExploration activities yielded a coalition of stakeholders, including two rural CHCs, who identified barriers and facilitators and reached consensus on two EBPs: mailed FIT and navigation to colonoscopy. Stakeholders further agreed that the delivery of those two EBPs should be centralized to an outreach center. During Preparation, workgroups developed and refined protocols for the following centrally-delivered intervention components: a registry to identify and track eligible patients, a centralized system for mailing at-home stool tests, and a process to navigate patients to colonoscopy after an abnormal stool test.ConclusionsThis description may be useful both to implementation scientists, who can draw lessons from applied implementation studies such as this to refine their implementation strategy typologies and frameworks, as well as to implementation practitioners seeking exemplars for operationalizing strategies in early phases of implementation in healthcare.
| S-EPMC10512568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe fastest growing age group globally is older adults, and preventing the need for long-term nursing care in this group is important for social and financial reasons. A population approach to diet and physical activity through the use of social services can play an important role in prevention. This study examined the effectiveness of a social health program for community-dwelling older adults aimed at introducing and promoting physical activity in the home at each individual's pace, helping participants maintain good dietary habits by keeping self-check sheets, and determining whether long-standing unhealthy or less-than-ideal physical and dietary habits can be changed.MethodThis cluster randomized trial conducted at 6 community centers in an urban community involved 92 community-dwelling older adults aged 65-90 years. The intervention group (3 community centers; n = 57) participated in the social health program "Sumida TAKE10!" which is an educational program incorporating the "TAKE10!® for Older Adults" program, once every 2 weeks for 3 months. The control group (3 community centers; n=35) was subsequently provided with the same program as a crossover intervention group. The main outcome measures were changes in food intake frequency, food frequency score (FFS), dietary variety score (DVS), and frequency of walking and exercise. The secondary outcome measures were changes in self-rated health, appetite, and the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology (TMIG) Index of Competence score.ResultsCompared to baseline, post-intervention food intake frequency for 6 of 10 food groups (meat, fish/shellfish, eggs, potatoes, fruits, and seaweed), FFS, and DVS were significantly increased in the intervention group, and interaction effects of FFS and DVS were seen between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between baseline and post-intervention in the control group. Frequency of walking and exercise remained unchanged in both groups, and no significant difference in improvement rate was seen between the groups. Self-rated health was significantly increased in the intervention group. Appetite and TMIG Index of Competence score were unchanged in both groups.ConclusionsThe social health program resulted in improved dietary habits, as measured by food intake frequency, FFS, and DVS, and may improve self-rated health among community-dwelling older adults.Trial registration numberUMIN000007357.
| S-EPMC3560222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The CRUZA trial tested the efficacy of an organizational-level intervention to increase capacity among Catholic parishes to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer control. This paper examines the external generalizability of the CRUZA study findings by comparing characteristics of parishes that agreed to participate in the intervention trial versus those that declined participation. Sixty-five Roman Catholic parishes that offered Spanish-language mass in Massachusetts were invited to complete a four-part survey assessing organization-level characteristics that, based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), may be associated with EBI implementation. Forty-nine parishes (75%) completed the survey and were invited to participate in the CRUZA trial, which randomized parishes to either a "capacity enhancement intervention" or a "standard dissemination" group. Of these 49 parishes, 31 (63%) agreed to participate in the trial, whereas 18 parishes (37%) declined participation. Parishes that participated in the CRUZA intervention trial were similar to those that did not participate with respect to "inner organizational setting" characteristics of the CFIR, including innovation and values fit, implementation climate, and organizational culture. Change commitment, a submeasure of organizational readiness that reflects the shared resolve of organizational members to implement an innovation, was significantly higher among the participating parishes (mean = 3.93, SD = 1.08) as compared to nonparticipating parishes (mean = 3.27, SD = 1.08) (Z = -2.16, p = .03). Parishes that agreed to participate in the CRUZA intervention trial were similar to those that declined participation with regard to organizational characteristics that may predict implementation of EBIs. Pragmatic tools to assess external generalizability in community-based implementation trials and to promote readiness among faith-based organizations to implement EBIs are needed to enhance the reach and impact of public health research. Clinical Trial information: The CRUZA trial identifier number with clinicaltrials.gov is NCT01740219.
| S-EPMC7529011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceEarly intervention for substance use is critical to improving adolescent outcomes. Studies have found promising results for Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), but little research has examined implementation.ObjectiveTo compare SBIRT implementation in pediatric primary care among trained pediatricians, pediatricians working in coordination with embedded behavioral health care practitioners (BHCPs), and usual care (UC).Design, setting, and participantsThe study is a 2-year (November 1, 2011, through October 31, 2013), nonblinded, cluster randomized, hybrid implementation and effectiveness trial examining SBIRT implementation outcomes across 2 modalities of implementation and UC. Fifty-two pediatricians from a large general pediatrics clinic in an integrated health care system were randomized to 1 of 3 SBIRT implementation arms; patients aged 12 to 18 years were eligible.InterventionsTwo modes of SBIRT implementation, (1) pediatrician only (pediatricians trained to provide SBIRT) and (2) embedded BHCP (BHCP trained to provide SBIRT), and (3) UC.Main outcomes and measuresImplementation of SBIRT (primary outcome), which included assessments, brief interventions, and referrals to specialty substance use and mental health treatment.ResultsThe final sample included 1871 eligible patients among 47 pediatricians; health care professional characteristics did not differ across study arms. Patients in the pediatrician-only (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 10.37; 95% CI, 5.45-19.74; P < .001) and the embedded BHCP (AOR, 18.09; 95% CI, 9.69-33.77; P < .001) arms had higher odds of receiving brief interventions compared with patients in the UC arm. Patients in the embedded BHCP arm were more likely to receive brief interventions compared with those in the pediatrician-only arm (AOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.31-2.31; P < .001). The embedded BHCP arm had lower odds of receiving a referral compared with the pediatrician-only (AOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.78; P < .001) and UC (AOR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89; P = .006) arms; odds of referrals did not differ between the pediatrician-only and UC arms.Conclusions and relevanceThe intervention arms had better screening, assessment, and brief intervention rates than the UC arm. Patients in the pediatrician-only and UC arms had higher odds of being referred to specialty treatment than those in the embedded BHCP arm, suggesting lingering barriers to having pediatricians fully address substance use in primary care. Findings also highlight age and ethnic groups less likely to receive these important services.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02408952.
| S-EPMC4779618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Implementing and sustaining evidence-based programs with fidelity may require multiple implementation strategies tailored to address multi-level, context-specific barriers and facilitators. Ideally, selecting and tailoring implementation strategies should be guided by theory, evidence, and input from relevant stakeholders; however, methods to guide the selection and tailoring of strategies are not well-developed. There is a need for more rigorous methods for assessing and prioritizing implementation determinants (barriers and facilitators) and linking implementation strategies to determinants. The Collaborative Organizational Approach to Selecting and Tailoring Implementation Strategies (COAST-IS) is an intervention designed to increase the effectiveness of evidence-based practice implementation and sustainment. COAST-IS will enable organizational leaders and clinicians to use Intervention Mapping to select and tailor implementation strategies to address their site-specific needs. Intervention Mapping is a multi-step process that incorporates theory, evidence, and stakeholder perspectives to ensure that implementation strategies effectively address key determinants of change. COAST-IS will be piloted with community mental health organizations that are working to address the needs of children and youth who experience trauma-related emotional or behavioral difficulties by engaging in a learning collaborative to implement an evidence-based psychosocial intervention (trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy). Organizations will be matched and then randomized to participate in the learning collaborative only (control) or to receive additional support through COAST-IS. The primary aims of this study are to (1) assess the acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and perceived utility of COAST-IS; (2) evaluate the organizational stakeholders' fidelity to the core elements of COAST-IS; and (3) demonstrate the feasibility of testing COAST-IS in a larger effectiveness trial. COAST-IS is a systematic method that integrates theory, evidence, and stakeholder perspectives to improve the effectiveness and precision of implementation strategies. If effective, COAST-IS has the potential to improve the implementation and sustainment of a wide range of evidence-based practices in mental health and other sectors. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03799432) on January 10, 2019 (last updated August 5, 2019).
| S-EPMC7207049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Appropriate colorectal cancer screening in older adults should be aligned with the likelihood of net benefit. In general, patient decision aids improve knowledge and values clarity, but in older adults, they may also help patients identify their individual likelihood of benefit and foster individualized decision-making. We report on the design of a randomized clinical trial to understand the effects of a patient decision aid on appropriate colorectal cancer screening. This report includes a description of the baseline characteristics of participants.English-speaking primary care patients aged 70-84?years who were not currently up to date with screening were recruited into a randomized clinical trial comparing a tailored colorectal cancer screening decision aid with an attention control. The intervention group received a decision aid that included a values clarification exercise and individualized decision-making worksheet, while the control group received an educational pamphlet on safe driving behaviors. The primary outcome was appropriate screening at 6?months based on chart review. We used a composite measure to define appropriate screening as screening for participants in good health, a discussion about screening for patients in intermediate health, and no screening for patients in poor health. Health state was objectively determined using patients' Charlson Comorbidity Index score and age.A total of 14 practices in central North Carolina participated as part of a practice-based research network. In total, 424 patients were recruited to participate and completed a baseline visit. Overall, 79% of participants were White and 58% female, with a mean age of 76.8?years. Patient characteristics between groups were similar by age, gender, race, education, insurance coverage, or work status. Overall, 70% had some college education or more, 57% were married, and virtually all had Medicare insurance (90%). The three primary medical conditions among the cohort were a history of diabetes, pneumonia, and cancer (28%, 26%, and 21%, respectively).We designed a randomized clinical trial to test a novel use of a patient decision aid to promote appropriate colorectal cancer screening and have recruited a diverse study population that seems similar between the intervention and control groups. The study should be able to determine the ability of a patient decision aid to increase individualized and appropriate colorectal cancer screening.
| S-EPMC5714684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Minoritized older adults face multiple health inequities and disparities, but are less likely to benefit from evidence-based health care interventions. With the increasing diversity of the U.S. aging population, there is a great promise for gerontology researchers to partner with racial/ethnic minority organizations and underrepresented communities to develop and implement evidence-based health interventions. Community-Based Participatory Research and Implementation Science offer guidance and strategies for researchers to develop and sustain community partnerships. However, researchers partnering with community organizations continue to face challenges in these collaborations, study outcomes, and sustainability. This may be especially true for those junior in their career trajectory or new to community-engaged research. The purpose of this forum article is to detail critical challenges that can affect gerontology researcher-community partnerships and relationships from the perspective of researchers. Seven challenges (pre- or mid-intervention design, implementation, and postimplementation phases) described within the Equity-focused Implementation Research for health programs framework are identified and discussed. Potential solutions are also presented. Planning for potential obstacles of the researcher-community partnerships can inform innovative solutions that will facilitate successful partnerships, thereby promoting the advancement of collaborative research between academic institutions and community organizations to improve older adult health outcomes.
| S-EPMC9451017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunity organizations can have difficulty implementing evidence-based prevention programs. More research is needed on implementation support interventions designed to help these organizations implement programs with quality.MethodsPreparing to Run Effective Programs (PREP) is a randomized controlled trial testing Getting To Outcomes (GTO), a 2-year implementation support intervention. It compares 15 Boys and Girls Club sites implementing CHOICE (control group), a five-session evidence-based alcohol and drug prevention program, with 14 similar sites implementing CHOICE supported by GTO (intervention group). PREP replicates a previous GTO study that had the same design, but featured a teen pregnancy prevention program instead. All sites received typical CHOICE training. Fourteen intervention sites received GTO manuals, training, and onsite technical assistance to help practitioners complete implementation best practices specified by GTO (i.e., GTO steps). During the first year, technical assistance providers helped the intervention group adopt, plan, and deliver CHOICE. Then, this group was trained on evaluation and quality improvement steps of GTO using feedback reports summarizing their own data, which yielded revised plans for subsequent implementation of CHOICE. This paper presents results regarding GTO's impact on CHOICE fidelity (adherence, quality of delivery, dosage) and the proximal outcomes of the youth participants (aged 10-14)-attitudes and intentions regarding cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana use. Fidelity was assessed at all sites by observer ratings and attendance logs. Proximal outcomes were assessed via survey at baseline, 3, and 6 months.ResultsAfter 1 year, fidelity and proximal outcomes were similar between Intervention and control groups. After 2 years (which included GTO quality improvement activities that took place between years 1 and 2), intervention sites had higher ratings of CHOICE adherence and quality of delivery (dosage remained similar). Proximal outcomes did not differ between groups in either year, although there was universally high endorsement of prosocial responses to those outcomes from the start.ConclusionsFindings suggest that systematic implementation support provided by GTO can help community organizations achieve better fidelity. Findings replicate the implementation results from a previous GTO study using the same design, but with a different evidence-based program and different fidelity measures. Although proximal outcomes did not change, in large part due to ceiling effects, the implementation findings suggest GTO can support a variety of programs.Trial registrationThis project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT02135991 . The trial was first registered on May 12, 2014.
| S-EPMC6196461 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceApproximately 24 million US individuals receive care at federally qualified health centers, which historically have low rates of colorectal cancer screening. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine colorectal cancer screening for individuals aged 50 to 75 years.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach program implemented in health centers as part of standard care.Design, setting, and participantsThis cluster randomized pragmatic clinical trial was conducted in 26 federally qualified health center clinics, representing 8 health centers in Oregon and California, randomized to intervention (n = 13) or usual care (n = 13). All participants were overdue for colorectal cancer screening during the accrual interval (February 4, 2014 to February 3, 2015).InterventionsElectronic health record-embedded tools to identify eligible adults and to facilitate implementation of a stepwise mailed intervention involving (1) an introductory letter, (2) a mailed FIT, and (3) a reminder letter; training, collaborative learning, and facilitation through a practice improvement process.Main outcomes and measuresEffectiveness was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who completed a FIT, and secondarily, any colorectal cancer screening within 12 months of accrual or by August 3, 2015. Implementation was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who were mailed an introductory letter and ordered a FIT.ResultsTwenty-six clinics with 41 193 adults (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [6.3] years; 22 994 women) were randomized to receive the direct mail colorectal screening intervention (13 clinics; 21 134 patients) or usual care (13 clinics; 20 059 patients). Compared with usual care clinics, intervention clinics had significantly higher adjusted clinic-level proportion of participants who completed a FIT (13.9% vs 10.4%; difference, 3.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%) and any colorectal cancer screening (18.3% vs 14.5%; difference, 3.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6%-7.0%). We observed large variation across health centers in effectiveness (FIT completion differences range, -7.4 percentage points to 17.6 percentage points) and implementation (proportion who were mailed a FIT range, 6.5% to 68.2%). The number needed to mail to achieve a completed FIT was 4.8 overall, and 4.0 in clinics that mailed a FIT reminder.Conclusions and relevanceAn EHR-embedded mailed FIT outreach intervention significantly improved rates of FIT completion and rates of any colorectal cancer screening. Higher rates of colorectal cancer screening occurred in clinics that successfully implemented the mailed outreach program.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01742065.
| S-EPMC6142956 | biostudies-literature