Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Navigation Program for Colorectal Cancer Screening to Reduce Social Health Inequalities: A French Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Components and effectiveness of patient navigation programmes to increase participation to breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Inequalities in cancer incidence and mortality can be partly explained by unequal access to high-quality health services, including cancer screening. Several interventions have been described to increase access to cancer screening, among them patient navigation (PN), a barrier-focused intervention. This systematic review aimed to identify the reported components of PN and to assess the effectiveness of PN to promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

We searched Embase, PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection databases. The components of PN programmes were identified, including the types of barriers addressed by navigators. The percentage change in screening participation was calculated.

RESULTS

The 44 studies included were mainly on colorectal cancer and were conducted in the USA. All described their goals and community characteristics, and the majority reported the setting (97.7%), monitoring and evaluation (97.7%), navigator background and qualifications (81.4%) and training (79.1%). Supervision was only referred to in 16 studies (36.4%). Programmes addressed mainly barriers at the educational (63.6%) and health system level (61.4%), while only 25.0% reported providing social and emotional support. PN increased cancer screening participation when compared with usual care (0.4% to 250.6% higher) and educational interventions (3.3% to 3558.0% higher).

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation programmes are effective at increasing participation to breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. A standardized reporting of the components of PN programmes would allow their replication and a better measure of their impact. Understanding the local context and needs is essential to design a successful PN programme.

Interventions to reduce cancer screening inequities: the perspective and role of patients, advocacy groups, and empowerment organizations

BACKGROUND

Health inequities lead to low rates of cancer screening in certain populations, such as low-income and ethnic minority groups. Different interventions to address this have been developed with mixed results. However, interventions are not always developed in collaboration with the people they target. The aim of our article is to present the viewpoint of patients, survivors, advocates, and lay persons on interventions to increase cancer screening from a health inequity perspective.

METHODS

We prepared talking points to guide discussions between coauthors, who included representatives from nine patient and survivor advocacy groups, organizations working for citizen/patient empowerment, and health equity experts. Perspectives and opinions were first collected through video conferencing meetings and a first draft of the paper was prepared. All authors, read through, revised, and discussed the contents to reach an agreement on the final perspectives to be presented.

RESULTS

Several themes were identified: it is important to not view screening as a discrete event; barriers underlying an individual's access and willingness to undergo screening span across a continuum; individually tailored interventions are likely to be more effective than a one-size fits-all approach because they may better accommodate the person's personal beliefs, knowledge, behaviors, and preferences; targeting people who are unknown to medical services and largely unreachable is a major challenge; including professional patient advocacy groups and relevant lay persons in the cocreation of interventions at all stages of design, implementation, and evaluation is essential along with relevant stakeholders (healthcare professionals, researchers, local government and community organizations etc).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to address cancer screening inequity currently do not adequately solve the issue, especially from the viewpoint of patients, survivors, and lay persons. Several core pathways should be focused on when designing and implementing interventions: advancing individually tailored interventions; digital tools and social media; peer-based approaches; empowerment; addressing policy and system barriers; better design of interventions; and collaboration, including the involvement of patients and patient advocacy organizations.

Cluster-randomized trials of cancer screening interventions: Has use of appropriate statistical methods increased over time?

BACKGROUND

In a cluster randomized trial, groups of individuals (e.g., clinics, schools) are randomized to conditions. The design and analysis of cluster randomized trials can require more care than individually randomized trials. Past reviews have noted deficiencies in the use of appropriate statistical methods for such trials.

METHODS

We reviewed cluster randomized trials of cancer screening interventions published 1995-2019 to determine whether appropriate statistical methods had been used for sample size calculation and outcome analysis and whether they reported intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values. This work expanded a previous review of articles published 1995-2010.

RESULTS

Our search identified 88 articles published 1995-2020 that reported outcomes of cluster randomized trials of breast, cervix, and colorectal cancer screening interventions. There was increased reporting of the trials' sample size calculations over time, with the percentage increasing from 31% in 1995-2004 to 77% in 2014-2019. However, the percentage of calculations failing to account for cluster randomization did not change over time and was 17% of studies in 2014-2019. There was a nonsignificant trend towards increased use of outcome analysis methods that accounted for the cluster randomized design. However, in lower impact journals, use of appropriate analysis methods was only 80% in 2014-2019. Only 33% of studies reported ICC values in 2014-2019.

CONCLUSION

For cluster randomized trials with cancer screening outcomes, there have been improvements in the reporting of sample size calculations but methodological and reporting deficiencies persist. Efforts to disseminate, adopt and report the use of appropriate statistical methodologies are still needed.

Evaluation of a mobile mammography unit: concepts and randomized cluster trial protocol of a population health intervention research to reduce breast cancer screening inequalities

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the leading cancer in women in France both in incidence and mortality. Organized breast cancer screening (OBCS) has been implemented nationwide since 2004, but the participation rate remains low (48%) and inequalities in participation have been reported. Facilities such as mobile mammography units could be effective to increase participation in OBCS and reduce inequalities, especially areas underserved in screening. Our main objective is to evaluate the impact of a mobile unit and to establish how it could be used to tackle territorial inequalities in OBCS participation.

METHODS

A collaborative project will be conducted as a randomized controlled cluster trial in 2022-2024 in remote areas of four French departments. Small geographic areas were constructed by clustering women eligible to OBCS, according to distance to the nearest radiology centre, until an expected sample of eligible women was attained, as determined by logistic and financial constraints. Intervention areas were then selected by randomization in parallel groups. The main intervention is to propose an appointment at the mobile unit in addition to current OBCS in these remote areas according to the principle of proportionate universalism. A few weeks before the intervention, OBCS will be promoted with a specific information campaign and corresponding tools, applying the principle of multilevel, intersectoral and community empowerment to tackle inequalities.

DISCUSSION

This randomized controlled trial will provide a high level of evidence in assessing the effects of mobile unit on participation and inequalities. Contextual factors impacting the intervention will be a key focus in this evaluation. Quantitative analyses will be complemented by qualitative analyses to investigate the causal mechanisms affecting the effectiveness of the intervention and to establish how the findings can be applied at national level.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, December 21, 2021: NCT05164874 .

Implementation and Uptake of Rural Lung Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE

Given the higher rates of tobacco use along with increased mortality specific to lung cancer in rural settings, low-dose CT (LDCT)-based lung cancer screening could be particularly beneficial to such populations. However, limited radiology facilities and increased geographical distance, combined with lower income and education along with reduced patient engagement, present heightened barriers to screening initiation and adherence.

METHODS

In collaboration with community leaders and stakeholders, we developed and implemented a community-based lung cancer screening program, including telephone-based navigation and tobacco cessation counseling support, serving 18 North Texas counties. Funding was available to support clinical services costs where needed. We collected data on LDCT referrals, orders, and completion.

RESULTS

To raise awareness for lung cancer screening, we leveraged our established collaborative network of more than 700 community partners. In the first year of operation, 107 medical providers referred 570 patients for lung cancer screening, of whom 488 (86%) were eligible for LDCT. The most common reasons for ineligibility were age (43%) and insufficient tobacco history (20%). Of 381 ordered LDCTs, 334 (88%) were completed. Among screened patients, 61% were current smokers and 36% had insurance coverage for the procedure. The program cost per patient was $430.

DISCUSSION

Implementation, uptake, and completion of LDCT-based lung cancer screening is feasible in rural settings. Community outreach, health promotion, and algorithm-based navigation may support such efforts. Given low lung cancer screening rates nationally and heightened lung cancer risk in rural populations, similar programs in other regions may be particularly impactful.

Community reintegration needs following paediatric brain injury: perspectives of caregivers and service providers

PURPOSE

To explore the processes of community reintegration of children and families at least one year following a paediatric brain injury from the perspective of caregivers and outpatient/community service providers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews from outpatient or community service providers (N = 14; occupational, physical, and speech and language therapists, neuropsychologists, school counsellors, recreational providers) and caregivers of six children (N = 8) at least one year after their injury. Interviews were transcribed and thematically coded using deductive (employing Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory) and inductive approaches.

RESULTS

Themes from both providers and caregivers indicated additional supports needed at all levels of Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory (i.e., individual, microsystem, mesosystem/exosystem, macrosystem, chronosystem). Participants felt that several characteristics would be needed in an ideal service system following paediatric brain injury including: community solutions ("it takes a village"), long-term approaches to care, and new financial approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that children and families have substantial community reintegration needs following paediatric brain injury. Multi-system interventions are needed to support long-term community reintegration, especially those that increase communication and support transitions. There is also a strong need for alternative funding to support these efforts.Implications for RehabilitationFamilies with a child with a moderate to severe brain injury face challenges with community reintegration a year or more after their child's injury.Effort should be put into helping families navigate the complex medical, insurance, and school systems with a navigator service and step-down care to ensure a continuum of care and to support community reintegration.Special support should be provided during transitions, such as transitions from hospital care to outpatient care, and across school transitions.

Inequalities in participation in colorectal cancer screening programmes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major public health problem due to its incidence and mortality. Screening programmes help decrease its impact on the population through early detection. However, the uneven distribution of social determinants of health can cause inequalities. The aim of this study is to identify the social inequalities in the participation in CRC screening programmes.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was carried out, searching in both health and social databases for papers published since 2000 in English, Spanish, Portuguese and French. The search strategies combined terms regarding screening, CRC, participation and social inequalities. Included papers were quantitative or qualitative primary studies analyzing gender and socioeconomic inequalities in the participation in CRC screening programmes implemented by public and private health-care providers and addressing 45- to 75-year-old population.

RESULTS

A total of 96 studies, described in 102 articles, were included. Most were quantitative observational studies and analyzed population-based screening programmes. They were carried out mainly in the UK (n=29) and the USA (n=18). Participation in screening programmes varied from 1.1% to 82.8% using several methods. A total of 87 studies assessed participation by sex and one focussed on men, but only two provided an analysis from a gender perspective. Although men are at a higher risk of developing CRC, they generally were less likely to participate in screening programmes. Screening attendance was higher among the least deprived areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender and socioeconomic inequalities in CRC screening participation should be addressed through the design of tailored interventions with a multidimensional focus.

Engaging Community Health Workers to Increase Cancer Screening: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review

CONTEXT

The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends engaging community health workers to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings on the basis of strong evidence of effectiveness. This systematic review examines the economic evidence of these interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed with a search period through April 2019 to identify relevant economic evaluation studies. All monetary values were adjusted to 2018 U.S. dollars, and the analysis was completed in 2019.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 19 studies were included in the final analysis with 3 on breast cancer, 5 on cervical cancer, 9 on colorectal cancer, and 2 that combined costs for breast and cervical cancers and for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. For cervical cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year saved of $762 and $34,405. For colorectal cancer screening, 2 U.S. studies reported both a negative incremental cost and an increase in quality-adjusted life years saved with colonoscopy screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging community health workers to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screenings is cost effective on the basis of estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were less than the conservative $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year threshold. In addition, quality-adjusted life years saved from colorectal screening with colonoscopy were associated with net healthcare cost savings.

Effect of Text Messaging on Bowel Preparation and Appointment Attendance for Outpatient Colonoscopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Outpatient colonoscopy is important for colorectal cancer screening. However, nonadherence and poor bowel preparation are common.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if an automated text messaging intervention with a focus on informational and reminder functions could improve attendance rates and bowel preparation quality for outpatient colonoscopy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted in an endoscopy center at an urban academic medical center. Adult patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy between January and September 2019 were enrolled by telephone call (early phase) or by automated text message (late phase). Data were analyzed from October 2019 to January 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

After enrollment, patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to usual care (ie, written instructions and nurse telephone call) or to the intervention (ie, usual care plus an automated series of 9 educational or reminder text messages in the week prior to scheduled colonoscopy).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was appointment attendance rate with good or excellent bowel preparation. Secondary outcomes included appointment attendance rate, bowel preparation quality (poor or inadequate, fair or adequate, and good or excellent), and cancellation lead time (in days).

RESULTS

Among 753 patients included and randomized in the trial (median [interquartile range] age, 56 [49-64] years; 364 [48.3%] men; 429 [57.2%] Black), 367 patients were randomized to the intervention group and 386 patients were randomized to the control group. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between groups (patients attending appointments with good or excellent bowel preparation: intervention, 195 patients [53.1%]; control, 210 patients [54.4%]; P = .73), including when stratified by early or late phase enrollment groups. Similarly, there were no significant differences in secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This randomized clinical trial found no significant difference in appointment attendance or bowel preparation quality with an automated text messaging intervention compared with the usual care control. Future work could optimize the content and delivery of text message interventions or identify patient subgroups that may benefit from this approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03710213.

The impact of interventions addressing socioeconomic inequalities in cancer-related outcomes in high-income countries: A systematic review

Background: High cancer mortality is a major source of burden. Population-wide programs have been developed to improve cancer outcomes, and although effective in improving outcomes overall, the socioeconomically disadvantaged population have disproportionately benefited. This systematic review evaluated interventions aimed at addressing inequalities in cancer-related outcomes between low and high socioeconomic groups within high-income countries. Materials and Methods: The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and PubMed searches were completed in October 2018. Data extraction and quality appraisal were guided by established mechanisms. Impact of interventions, using odds ratios, with respective 95% confidence intervals were presented, where available. Results: Sixteen studies reporting on 19 interventions were included. Seven interventions (37%) reduced socioeconomic inequalities in cancer-related outcomes, focusing on participation in cancer screening. Interventions included pre-formulated implementation intentions; GP-endorsed screening invitations; enhanced reminder letters; text message reminders; and implementation of an organised screening program. Conclusions: This systematic review found limited evidence on the efficacy of existing interventions that aimed to reduce inequalities in cancer-related outcomes between people living in low and high socioeconomic areas among high-income countries. Future interventions should consider the specific needs of people living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas to improve the efficacy of an intervention.

Proven Strategies for Increasing Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented or detected early through screening and surveillance, barriers that lower adherence to screening significantly limit its effectiveness. Therefore, implementation of interventions that address and overcome adherence barriers is critical to efforts to decrease morbidity and mortality from CRC. This article reviews the current available evidence about interventions to increase adherence to CRC screening.

Exploring the role of lay and professional patient navigators in Canada

OBJECTIVES

To explore the roles of patient navigators in different settings and situations for various patient populations and to understand the rationale for implementing lay and professional models of patient navigation in a Canadian context.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive design was applied, using interviews with 10 patient navigators from eight Canadian provinces, and Braun and Clarke's six phases of thematic analysis to guide the analysis of interview transcripts.

RESULTS

Findings indicate that a patient navigator's personality and experience (personal and work-related) may be more important than their specific designation (i.e. lay or professional).

CONCLUSIONS

Lay and professional navigators in Canada appear to be well suited to provide navigational services across populations. This study has the potential to inform future research, policy, and the delivery of navigation programmes in Canada.

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations in the United States experience disparities in the use of preventive health services.

PURPOSE

To examine effects of barriers that create health disparities in 10 recommended preventive services for adults, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services database (1 January 1996 to 5 July 2019); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials, observational studies with comparison groups, and systematic reviews of populations adversely affected by disparities that reported effects of barriers on use of any of the 10 selected preventive services or that reported the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities in use of a preventive service by improving intermediate or clinical outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Dual extraction and assessment of study quality, strength of evidence, and evidence applicability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No studies reported effects of provider-specific barriers on preventive service use. Eighteen studies reporting effects of patient barriers, such as insurance coverage or lack of a regular provider, on preventive service use had mixed and inconclusive findings. Studies of patient-provider interventions (n = 12), health information technologies (n = 11), and health system interventions (n = 88) indicated higher cancer screening rates with patient navigation; telephone calls, prompts, and other outreach methods; reminders involving lay health workers; patient education; risk assessment, counseling, and decision aids; screening checklists; community engagement; and provider training. Single studies showed that clinician-delivered and technology-assisted interventions improved rates of smoking cessation and weight loss, respectively.

LIMITATION

Insufficient or low strength of evidence and applicability for most interventions except patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers.

CONCLUSION

In populations adversely affected by disparities, patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers increase cancer screening.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109263).

Nationwide cohort study of the impact of education, income and social isolation on survival after acute colorectal cancer surgery

Background

Acute colorectal cancer surgery has been associated with a high postoperative mortality. The primary aim of this study was to examine the association between socioeconomic position and the likelihood of undergoing acute versus elective colorectal cancer surgery. A secondary aim was to determine 1‐year survival among patients treated with acute surgery.

Methods

All patients who had undergone a surgical procedure according to the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG.dk) database, or who were registered with stent or diverting stoma in the National Patient Register from 2007 to 2015, were reviewed. Socioeconomic position was determined by highest attained educational level, income, urbanicity and cohabitation status, obtained from administrative registries. Co‐variables included age, sex, year of surgery, Charlson Co‐morbidity Index score, smoking status, alcohol consumption, BMI, stage and tumour localization. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the likelihood of acute colorectal cancer surgery, and Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression methods were used for analysis of 1‐year overall survival.

Results

In total, 35 661 patients were included; 5310 (14·9 per cent) had acute surgery. Short and medium education in patients younger than 65 years (odds ratio (OR) 1·58, 95 per cent c.i. 1·32 to 1·91, and OR 1·34, 1·15 to 1·55 respectively), low income (OR 1·12, 1·01 to 1·24) and living alone (OR 1·35, 1·26 to 1·46) were associated with acute surgery. Overall, 40·7 per cent of patients died within 1 year of surgery. Short education (hazard ratio (HR) 1·18, 95 per cent c.i. 1·03 to 1·36), low income (HR 1·16, 1·01 to 1·34) and living alone (HR 1·25, 1·13 to 1·38) were associated with reduced 1‐year survival after acute surgery.

Conclusion

Low socioeconomic position was associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing acute colorectal cancer surgery, and with reduced 1‐year overall survival after acute surgery.

Economics of Multicomponent Interventions to Increase Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Community Guide Systematic Review

CONTEXT

The Community Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended multicomponent interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening based on strong evidence of effectiveness. This systematic review examines the economic evidence to guide decisions on the implementation of these interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search for economic evidence was performed from January 2004 to January 2018. All monetary values were reported in 2016 US dollars, and the analysis was completed in 2018.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fifty-three studies were included in the body of evidence from a literature search yield of 8,568 total articles. For multicomponent interventions to increase breast cancer screening, the median intervention cost per participant was $26.69 (interquartile interval [IQI]=$3.25, $113.72), and the median incremental cost per additional woman screened was $147.64 (IQI=$32.92, $924.98). For cervical cancer screening, the median costs per participant and per additional woman screened were $159.80 (IQI=$117.62, $214.73) and $159.49 (IQI=$64.74, $331.46), respectively. Two studies reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of $748 and $33,433. For colorectal cancer screening, the median costs per participant and per additional person screened were $36.63 (IQI=$7.70, $139.23) and $582.44 (IQI=$91.10, $1,452.12), respectively. Two studies indicated a decline in incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of $1,651 and $3,817.

CONCLUSIONS

Multicomponent interventions to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screening were cost effective based on a very conservative threshold. Additionally, multicomponent interventions for colorectal cancer screening demonstrated net cost savings. Cost effectiveness for multicomponent interventions to increase breast cancer screening could not be determined owing to the lack of studies reporting incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Future studies estimating this outcome could assist implementers with decision making.

The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs across the cancer continuum: A systematic review

Published studies regarding patient navigation (PN) and cancer were reviewed to assess quality, determine gaps, and identify avenues for future research. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for studies investigating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of PN across the cancer continuum. Each included article was scored independently by 2 separate reviewers with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. The current review identified 113 published articles that assessed PN and cancer care, between August 1, 2010, and February 1, 2018, 14 of which reported on the cost-effectiveness of PN programs. Most publications focused on the effectiveness of PN in screening (50%) and diagnosis (27%) along the continuum of cancer care. Many described the effectiveness of PN for breast cancer (52%) or colorectal cancer outcomes (51%). Most studies reported favorable outcomes for PN programs, including increased uptake of and adherence to cancer screenings, timely diagnostic resolution and follow-up, higher completion rates for cancer therapy, and higher rates of attending medical appointments. Cost-effectiveness studies showed that PN programs yielded financial benefits. Quality assessment showed that 75 of the 113 included articles (65%) had 2 or more weak components. In conclusion, this review indicates numerous gaps within the PN and cancer literature where improvement is needed. For example, more research is needed at other points along the continuum of cancer care outside of screening and diagnosis. In addition, future research into the effectiveness of PN for understudied cancers outside of breast and colorectal cancer is necessary along with an assessment of cost-effectiveness and more rigorous reporting of study designs and results in published articles.