Evaluation of a patient navigation program to promote colorectal cancer screening in rural Georgia, USA

BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Early detection through recommended screening has been shown to have favorable treatment outcomes, yet screening rates among the medically underserved and uninsured are low, particularly for rural and minorit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cancer 2013-08, Vol.119 (16), p.3059-3066
Hauptverfasser: Honeycutt, Sally, Green, Rhonda, Ballard, Denise, Hermstad, April, Brueder, Alex, Haardörfer, Regine, Yam, Jennifer, Arriola, Kimberly J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Early detection through recommended screening has been shown to have favorable treatment outcomes, yet screening rates among the medically underserved and uninsured are low, particularly for rural and minority populations. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a patient navigation program that addresses individual and systemic barriers to CRC screening for patients at rural, federally qualified community health centers. METHODS This quasiexperimental evaluation compared low‐income patients at average risk for CRC (n = 809) from 4 intervention clinics and 9 comparison clinics. We ed medical chart data on patient demographics, CRC history and risk factors, and CRC screening referrals and examinations. Outcomes of interest were colonoscopy referral and examination during the study period and being compliant with recommended screening guidelines at the end of the study period. We conducted multilevel logistic analyses to evaluate the program's effectiveness. RESULTS Patients at intervention clinics were significantly more likely than patients at comparison clinics to undergo colonoscopy screening (35% versus 7%, odds ratio = 7.9, P 
ISSN:0008-543X
1097-0142
DOI:10.1002/cncr.28033