Mailed FIT Outreach 2022
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
DISEASE(S): Colon Cancer,Colorectal Cancer,Colorectal Neoplasms,Colonic Neoplasms
PROVIDER: 2719791 | ecrin-mdr-crc |
REPOSITORIES: ECRIN MDR
Similar Datasets
Project description:The main study aim is to develop, implement and disseminate a pilot population-based mailed FIT outreach screening program in the Philadelphia VA Medical Center that does not rely on having an office visit, by conducting a proof-of-concept 3-arm parallel-design pragmatic randomized trial to (1) Compare the effects of usual care (UC), screening invitation + reminder (invitation-reminder), or screening invitation + mailed FIT kit + reminder (mailed-FIT); (2) Explore whether the FIT completion rate varies by age or race/ethnicity; and (3) Explore barriers to use of mailed outreach screening for Veterans.
| 2200808 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:RATIONALE: Screening may help doctors find colorectal cancer sooner, when it may be easier to treat. Computerized and mailed reminders may help increase the rate of colorectal cancer screening in adults with an average risk for colorectal cancer.
PURPOSE: This randomized clinical trial is studying how well computerized and mailed reminders work in increasing the rate of colorectal cancer screening in adults with an average risk for colorectal cancer.
| 2031082 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Background & aimsSurveillance of patients with cirrhosis increases early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and prolongs survival. However, its effectiveness is limited by underuse, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities and individuals of low socioeconomic status. We compared the effectiveness of mailed outreach strategies, with and without patient navigation, in increasing the numbers of patients with cirrhosis undergoing surveillance for HCC in a racially diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort.MethodsWe performed a prospective study of patients with documented or suspected cirrhosis at a large safety-net health system from December 2014 through March 2016. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1:1) to groups that received mailed invitations for an ultrasound screening examination (n = 600), mailed invitations for an ultrasound screening examination and patient navigation (barrier assessment and motivational education for patients who declined screening; n = 600), or usual care (visit-based screening; n = 600). Patients who did not respond to outreach invitations within 2 weeks received up to 3 reminder telephone calls. The primary outcome was completion of abdominal imaging within 6 months of randomization.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar among groups. Cirrhosis was documented, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, codes, for 79.6% of patients, and suspected, based on noninvasive markers of fibrosis, for 20.4%. In an intent-to-treat analysis, significantly greater proportions of patients who received the mailed invitation and navigation (47.2%) or the mailed invitation alone (44.5%) underwent HCC screening than patients who received usual care (24.3%) (P < .001 for both comparisons). However, screening rates did not differ significantly between outreach the outreach groups (P = .25). The effects of the outreach program were consistent in all subgroups, including Caucasian vs non-Caucasian race, documented vs suspected cirrhosis, Child-Pugh A vs B cirrhosis, and receipt of gastroenterology care.ConclusionsIn a prospective study, we found outreach strategies to double the percentage of patients with cirrhosis who underwent ultrasound screening for HCC. However, adding patient navigation to telephone reminders provided no significant additional benefit. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02312817.
| S-EPMC5285373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionColorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. Although various interventions have improved screening rates, they often require abundant resources and can be difficult to implement. Social psychology and behavioral economics principles offer an opportunity for low-cost and easy-to-implement strategies but are less common in clinical settings.MethodsWe randomized 2,000 patients aged 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening to one of the 2 mailed interventions: a previously used text-based letter describing and offering fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and colonoscopy (usual care arm); or a letter leveraging social psychology and behavioral economics principles (e.g., implied scarcity and choice architecture), minimal text, and multiple images to offer FIT and colonoscopy (intervention arm). We compared total screening uptake, FIT uptake, and colonoscopy uptake at 1-month intervals in each group.ResultsThere were 1,882 patients included in the final analysis. The mean age was 69.3 years, and baseline characteristics in the 2 groups were similar. Screening completion at 26 weeks was 19.5% in the usual care arm (16.3% FIT vs 3.2% colonoscopy, P < 0.01) and 24.1% in the intervention arm (22.1% FIT vs 2.0% colonoscopy, P < 0.01) (P = 0.02).DiscussionAmong primary care patients aged 50-75 years in an academic setting, mailed CRC outreach employing social psychology and behavioral economics principles led to a higher participation in CRC screening than usual care mailed outreach.Translational impactMailed interventions to increase CRC screening should incorporate social psychology and behavioral economics principles to improve participation.
| S-EPMC7056051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSurveillance rates for HCC remain limited in patients with cirrhosis. We evaluated whether opt-out mailed outreach increased uptake with or without a $20 unconditional incentive.MethodsThis was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in an urban academic health system including adult patients with cirrhosis or advanced fibrosis, at least 1 visit to a specialty practice in the past 2 years and no surveillance in the last 7 months. Patients were randomized in a 1:2:2 ratio to (1) usual care, (2) a mailed letter with a signed order for an ultrasound, or (3) a mailed letter with an order and a $20 unconditional incentive. The main outcome was the proportion with completion of ultrasound within 6 months.ResultsAmong the 562 patients included, the mean age was 62.1 (SD 11.1); 56.8% were male, 51.1% had Medicare, and 40.6% were Black. At 6 months, 27.6% (95% CI: 19.5-35.7) completed ultrasound in the Usual care arm, 54.5% (95% CI: 47.9-61.0) in the Letter + Order arm, and 54.1% (95% CI: 47.5-60.6) in the Letter + Order + Incentive arm. There was a significant increase in the Letter + Order arm compared to Usual care (absolute difference of 26.9%; 95% CI: 16.5-37.3; p<0.001), but no significant increase in the Letter + Order + Incentive arm compared to Letter + Order (absolute difference of -0.4; 95% CI: -9.7 to 8.8; p=0.93).ConclusionsThere was an increase in HCC surveillance from mailed outreach with opt-out framing and a signed order slip, but no increase in response to the financial incentive.
| S-EPMC10727671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRoutine screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality, but screening rates fall below national targets and are particularly low in underserved populations.ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of a single text message outreach to serial text messaging and mailed fecal home test kits on colorectal cancer screening rates.DesignA two-armed randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsAn urban community health center in Philadelphia. Adults aged 50-74 who were due for colorectal cancer screening had at least one visit to the practice in the previously year, and had a cell phone number recorded.InterventionsParticipants were randomized (1:1 ratio). Individuals in the control arm were sent a simple text message reminder as per usual practice. Those in the intervention arm were sent a pre-alert text message offering the options to opt-out of receiving a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit, followed by up to three behaviorally informed text message reminders.Main measuresThe primary outcome was participation in colorectal cancer screening at 12 weeks. The secondary outcome was the FIT kit return rate at 12 weeks.Key resultsFour hundred forty participants were included. The mean age was 57.4 years (SD ± 6.1). 63.4% were women, 87.7% were Black, 19.1% were uninsured, and 49.6% were Medicaid beneficiaries. At 12 weeks, there was an absolute 17.3 percentage point increase in colorectal cancer screening in the intervention arm (19.6%), compared to the control arm (2.3%, p < 0.001). There was an absolute 17.7 percentage point increase in FIT kit return in the intervention arm (19.1%) compared to the control arm (1.4%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsSerial text messaging with opt-out mailed FIT kit outreach can substantially improve colorectal cancer screening rates in an underserved population.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03479645 ).
| S-EPMC8298623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionLimited data exists on the effectiveness of organized outreach campaigns on CRC screening completion for patients who are newly eligible for such screening.MethodsWe conducted an analysis of an existing clinical trial dataset of a publicly funded safety-net health system serving low-income populations.ResultsA total of 619 patients aged 50-51 received the outreach intervention and 3108 patients aged greater than 51 years old who had no prior history of FIT testing similarly received the outreach intervention. Patients newly eligible for FIT were more likely to complete a FIT test compared with older patients who had yet to complete a FIT test (58.3% vs 40.5%, p < 0.001).ConclusionPatients who are newly eligible for colorectal cancer screening are more likely to respond to outreach interventions than older patients without a prior history of FIT, indicating newly eligible patients across diverse populations may benefit from targeted outreach intervention.
| S-EPMC10039682 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The effectiveness of annual mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) outreach is highest when return rates are optimized, which is aided by patient reminders. In a pilot patient-randomized controlled trial in two western Washington clinics of the Sea Mar Community Health Centers, we compared the effectiveness of two phone-based approaches to mailed FIT outreach reminders. In fall 2016, patients ages 50-75, due for colorectal cancer screening, and with a visit in the previous year at either of two clinics, were mailed an introductory letter and FIT. Those who did not return the FIT within 3?weeks (N?=?427) were randomized to receive either: a) a series of up to 6 automated phone reminders; or b) the combination of automated and live phone reminders (up to 6 in total). The sole outcome was FIT return within 6?months after the FIT mailing. FIT completion rates were similar in the groups assigned to receive automated calls vs automated plus live calls (40% vs 39%; p?=?0.89). The effectiveness of FIT reminder mode differed by language preference (p for interaction?=?0.03): among Spanish-preferring patients (n?=?106), FIT return rates were higher in the automated-only group than to the auto- plus live-call group (62% vs 39%, p?=?0.02). Among English-preferring patients, no difference in modes was observed (n?=?279, 32% vs 34%, p?=?0.74). We observed no added benefit of live reminder calls in a mailed FIT plus automated call reminder program; our findings may inform efforts to efficiently optimize mailed-FIT outreach programs. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01742065.
| S-EPMC6199768 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance is associated with early tumor detection and improved survival in patients with cirrhosis; however, effectiveness is limited by underuse. We compared the effectiveness of mailed outreach and patient navigation strategies to increase HCC surveillance in a racially diverse cohort of patients with cirrhosis. We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial comparing mailed outreach for screening ultrasound (n = 600), mailed outreach plus patient navigation (n = 600), or usual care with visit-based screening (n = 600) among 1800 patients with cirrhosis at a large safety-net health system from December 2014 to March 2017. Patients who did not respond to outreach invitations within 2 weeks received reminder telephone calls. Patient navigation included an assessment of barriers to surveillance and encouragement of surveillance participation. The primary outcome was HCC surveillance (abdominal imaging every 6 months) over an 18-month period. All 1800 patients were included in intention-to-screen analyses. HCC surveillance was performed in 23.3% of outreach/navigation patients, 17.8% of outreach-alone patients, and 7.3% of usual care patients. HCC surveillance was 16.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.0%-20.0%) and 10.5% (95% CI: 6.8%-14.2%) higher in outreach groups than usual care (P < 0.001 for both) and 5.5% (95% CI: 0.9%-10.1%) higher for outreach/navigation than outreach alone (P = 0.02). Both interventions increased HCC surveillance across predefined patient subgroups. The proportion of HCC patients detected at an early stage did not differ between groups; however, a higher proportion of patients with screen-detected HCC across groups had early-stage tumors than those with HCC detected incidentally or symptomatically (83.3% versus 30.8%, P = 0.003). Conclusion: Mailed outreach invitations and navigation significantly increased HCC surveillance versus usual care in patients with cirrhosis.
| S-EPMC6324997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsClinical guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening suggest use of either stool-based tests or colonoscopy - modalities that differ in recommended screening intervals, adherence, and costs. We know little about the long-term cost differences in population-health outreach strategies to promote these strategies.MethodsWe conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare 2 mailed outreach strategies to increase CRC screening from a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial: mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits vs invitations to complete a screening colonoscopy. We built a 10-year Markov chain Monte Carlo microsimulation model to account for differences in screening intervals, adherence, and costs.ResultsMailed FIT kits had a lower 10-year average per-person cost of screening relative to colonoscopy invitations ($1139 vs $1725) but with 10.89 fewer months of compliance and 60 fewer advanced neoplasia detected (37 advanced adenomas and 23 CRC). Incremental cost effectiveness ratios for colonoscopy invitations compared with mailed FIT kits were $55.23, $15.84, and $25.48 per additional covered month, advanced adenoma, and CRC, respectively. Although FIT was the preferred strategy at low willingness-to-pay thresholds, the 2 strategies were equal at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $41.31 per covered month gained.ConclusionMailed FIT or colonoscopy invitations are both options to improve CRC screening completion and advanced neoplasia detection, and the choice of outreach strategy may differ by a health system's willingness-to-pay threshold. Mailed FIT kits are less expensive than colonoscopy invitations but result in fewer months of screening compliance and advanced neoplasia detected.
| S-EPMC9357235 | biostudies-literature