Dataset Information

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening rates are low among disadvantaged patients; few studies have explored barriers to screening in community health centers. The purpose of this study was to describe barriers to/facilitators of colorectal cancer screening among diverse patients served by community health centers. METHODS: We identified twenty-three outpatients who were eligible for colorectal cancer screening and their 10 primary care physicians. Using in-depth semi-structured interviews, we asked patients to describe factors influencing their screening decisions. For each unscreened patient, we asked his or her physician to describe barriers to screening. We conducted patient interviews in English (n = 8), Spanish (n = 2), Portuguese (n = 5), Portuguese Creole (n = 1), and Haitian Creole (n = 7). We audiotaped and transcribed the interviews, and then identified major themes in the interviews. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: 1) Unscreened patients cited lack of trust in doctors as a barrier to screening whereas few physicians identified this barrier; 2) Unscreened patients identified lack of symptoms as the reason they had not been screened; 3) A doctor's recommendation, or lack thereof, significantly influenced patients' decisions to be screened; 4) Patients, but not their physicians, cited fatalistic views about cancer as a barrier. Conversely, physicians identified competing priorities, such as psychosocial stressors or comorbid medical illness, as barriers to screening. In this culturally diverse group of patients seen at community health centers, similar barriers to screening were reported by patients of different backgrounds, but physicians perceived other factors as more important. CONCLUSION: Further study of these barriers is warranted.

SUBMITTER: Lasser KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2373875 | biostudies-other | 2008

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a qualitative study.

Lasser Karen E KE Ayanian John Z JZ Fletcher Robert H RH Good Mary-Jo DelVecchio MJ

BMC family practice 20080227

<h4>Background</h4>Colorectal cancer screening rates are low among disadvantaged patients; few studies have explored barriers to screening in community health centers. The purpose of this study was to describe barriers to/facilitators of colorectal cancer screening among diverse patients served by community health centers.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified twenty-three outpatients who were eligible for colorectal cancer screening and their 10 primary care physicians. Using in-depth semi-structured in ...[more]

PMID: 18304342

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecommended annual diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening for people with diabetes has low rates in the USA, especially in underserved populations. Telemedicine DR screening (TDRS) in primary care clinics could expand access and increase adherence. Despite this potential, studies have observed high variability in TDRS rates among clinics and over time, highlighting the need for implementation supports. Previous studies of determinants of TDRS focus on patients' perspectives, with few studies targeting upstream multi-level barriers and facilitators. Addressing this gap, this qualitative study aimed to identify and evaluate multi-level perceived determinants of TDRS in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), to inform the development of targeted implementation strategies.MethodsWe developed a theory-based semi-structured interview tool based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We conducted 22 key informant interviews with professionals involved in TDRS (administrators, clinicians, staff). The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reported barriers and facilitators were organized into emergent themes and classified according to CFIR constructs. Constructs influencing TDRS implementation were rated for each study site and compared across sites by the investigators.ResultsProfessionals identified 21 main barriers and facilitators under twelve constructs of the five CFIR domains. Several identified themes were novel, whereas others corroborated previous findings in the literature (e.g., lack of time and human resources, presence of a champion). Of the 21 identified themes, 13 were classified under the CFIR's Inner Setting domain, specifically under the constructs Compatibility and Available Resources. Themes under the Outer Setting domain (constructs External Incentives and Cost) were primarily perceived by administrators, whereas themes in other domains were perceived across all professional categories. Two Inner Setting (Leadership Engagement, Goals and Feedback) and two Process (Champion, Engaging) constructs were found to strongly distinguish sites with high versus low TDRS performance.ConclusionsThis study classified barriers and facilitators to TDRS as perceived by administrators, clinicians, and staff in FQHCs, then identified CFIR constructs that distinguished high- and low-performance clinics. Implementation strategies such as academic detailing and collection and communication of program data and successes to leadership; engaging of stakeholders through involvement in implementation planning; and appointment of intervention champions may therefore improve TDRS implementation and sustainment in resource-constrained settings.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Limited health literacy is linked with poor health behaviors, limited health care access, and poor health outcomes. Improving individual and population health outcomes requires understanding and addressing barriers to promoting health literacy. METHODS:Using the socio-ecological model as a guiding framework, this qualitative study (Phase 1 of a larger ongoing project) explored the interpersonal and organizational levels that may impact the health literacy levels of patients seeking care at federally qualified community health centers (FQCHCs) in Rhode Island. Focus groups were conducted with FQCHC employees (n?=?37) to explore their perceptions of the health literacy skills of their patients, health literacy barriers patients encounter, and possible strategies to increase health literacy. The focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed, and transcripts were coded using a process of open, axial, and selective coding. Codes were grouped into categories, and the constant comparative approach was used to identify themes. RESULTS:Eight unique themes centered on health literacy, sources of health information, organizational culture's impact, challenges from limited health literacy, and suggestions to ameliorate the impact of limited health literacy. All focus group participants were versed in health literacy and viewed health literacy as impacting patients' health status. Participants perceived that some patients at their FQCHC have limited health literacy. Participants spoke of themselves and of their FQCHC addressing health literacy through organizational- and provider-level strategies. They also identified additional strategies (e.g., training staff and providers on health literacy, providing patients with information that includes graphics) that could be adopted or expanded upon to address and promote health literacy. CONCLUSIONS:Study findings suggest that strategies may need to be implemented at the organizational-, provider-, and patient- level to advance health literacy. The intervention phase of this project will explore intervention strategies informed by study results, and could include offering health literacy training to providers and staff to increase their understanding of health literacy to include motivation to make and act on healthy decisions and strategies to address health literacy, including the use of visual aids.

Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce cancer deaths. However, screening and abnormal test follow-up rates are low among underserved populations. The screening rates of 19-58%, and rates of colonoscopy completion after abnormal stool tests of 18-57% in community health centers (CHC) systems are low. This highlights an opportunity to improve early detection and decrease burden of CRC in our region. Mailed outreach and navigation programs have been shown to increase colonoscopy completion rate. The next step is to understand how to best implement these programs in the community on a larger scale. To achieve this goal, the investigators propose a Hub-and-Spoke intervention combining centralized strategies to maximize CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care. The investigators hypothesize that this intervention will be superior to usual care for increasing CRC screening, abnormal test follow-up, and referral-to-care. The investigators will conduct a randomized trial to determine effectiveness in: 1) improvement in proportion of individuals up-to-date with screening 3 years post implementation; 2) proportion with abnormal FIT who complete diagnostic colonoscopy within 6 months; and 3) proportion with CRC completing first treatment evaluation. The investigators will also evaluate the implementation, scalability, and sustainability of the multi-level implementation strategy. The intervention consists of: Mailed FIT and Reminders. Eligible individuals will receive an introductory letter describing the importance of CRC screening and noting that follow-up mail will include a FIT Kit. It will also be offered to patients who completed prior mailed FIT with normal test results. All materials will be in English and Spanish. Two weeks later, participants will receive a packet via mail containing the FIT kit, a one-page invitation inviting FIT completion and FIT instructions, a postage-paid envelope for return to the patient’s CHC, and COVID-19 message. For non-compliant individuals not returning the kit, a reminder phone call and text message will be delivered 2 weeks later. The investigators will track returned letters, individuals who are later found to be up-to date with screening, and those who decline screening. The CHC will provide care coordination for patients with an abnormal FIT result.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based programs such as mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach can only affect health outcomes if they can be successfully implemented. However, attempts to implement programs are often limited by organizational-level factors.ObjectivesAs part of the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) pragmatic trial, we evaluated how organizational factors impacted the extent to which health centers implemented a mailed FIT outreach program.DesignEight health centers participated in STOP CRC. The intervention consisted of customized electronic health record tools and clinical staff training to facilitate mailing of an introduction letter, FIT kit, and reminder letter. Health centers had flexibility in how they delivered the program.Main measuresWe categorized the health centers' level of implementation based on the proportion of eligible patients who were mailed a FIT kit, and applied configurational comparative methods to identify combinations of relevant organizational-level and program-level factors that distinguished among high, medium, and low implementing health centers. The factors were categorized according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research model.Key resultsFIT tests were mailed to 21.0-81.7% of eligible participants at each health center. We identified a two-factor solution that distinguished among levels of implementation with 100% consistency and 100% coverage. The factors were having a centralized implementation team (inner setting) and mailing the introduction letter in advance of the FIT kit (intervention characteristics). Health centers with high levels of implementation had the joint presence of both factors. In health centers with medium levels of implementation, only one factor was present. Health centers with low levels of implementation had neither factor present.ConclusionsFull implementation of the STOP CRC intervention relied on a centralized implementation team with dedicated staffing time, and the advance mailing of an introduction letter.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01742065 Registered 05 December 2012-Prospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a qualitative study.

Publications

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure