Colorectal cancer screening in a safety-net health system: The intersectional impact of race, ethnicity, language, and mental health

Prostate Cancer Screening Among Traditionally Underserved Populations at a Large Public Safety-Net Institution

BACKGROUND

Existing literature underscores racial and sociodemographic disparities in prostate cancer screening (PCS) in the USA.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether traditional PCS disparities are evident within a health safety-net institution tailored to support traditionally underserved populations.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study using electronic health-record data was conducted at an urban safety-net institution.

PARTICIPANTS

Male patients aged 51-70 years with a primary care provider (PCP) visit from 2018 to 2019 were included.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was PCS, defined as receiving a Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) blood test within the study period. Investigated patient characteristics included self-reported race and ethnicity, language, insurance, marital status, median household income, serious mental illness (SMI), substance use disorder (SUD), and family history of prostate cancer (PCa). Bivariate analyses using chi-squared tests and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to compare PCS rates between the groups.

KEY RESULTS

The cohort included 10,059 men, of which 40.4% had PCS. In total, 57.3% of the study population was of non-White race and 61.4% of non-North American/European ethnicity. A total of 31.2% had limited English proficiency (LEP), 17.8% had SMI, and 13.2% had SUD. In multivariable analysis of race, Black patients (OR 1.96, 95%CI 1.71-2.24, p < 0.001) and Hispanic patients (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.3-1.76, p < 0.001) had significantly higher odds of PCS than White patients. Patients with LEP did not exhibit significantly lower screening rates than English-speaking patients (ORs 0.99-1.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Within a healthcare institution designed and implemented to meet the needs of underserved populations, traditional racial and sociodemographic disparities in PCS are not evident.

Multilevel intervention for follow-up of abnormal FIT in the safety-net: IMProving Adherence to Colonoscopy through Teams and Technology (IMPACTT)

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is a widely used first step for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Abnormal FIT results require a colonoscopy for screening completion and CRC diagnosis, but the rate of timely colonoscopy is low, especially among patients in safety-net settings. Multi-level factors at the clinic- and patient-levels influence colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT. Our study aims to implement a multi-level approach consisting of a clinic- and patient-level intervention to improve the completion of diagnostic colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT.

METHODS

We will test a multilevel intervention with one safety-net system across 12 primary care clinics - a clinic-level intervention using a stepped wedge design and a patient-level intervention with patient-level randomization. At the clinic level, we will implement a "best practices bundle" to improve workflow for primary care providers and staff using a stepped-wedge design. At the patient level, we will randomize 2000 patients to receive text messages and call reminders or usual care.

RESULTS

For the main analysis, we will use a mixed effects logistic model to assess the impact of the clinic intervention on the primary outcome (completion of colonoscopy within 180 days after abnormal FIT). Secondary outcomes include median days to colonoscopy completion, rate of referral to colonoscopy at 42 days, rate of scheduled colonoscopy at 56 days, and bowel preparation quality at colonoscopy.

DISCUSSION

This study will assess the extent to which a multi-level intervention can improve timely colonoscopy completion in a diverse patient population cared for in a safety-net setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT, NCT06191185. Registered 20 December 2023, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06191185.

Disability and Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess the impact of disability on participation in CRC screening and to determine the overall effect size.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare CRC screening participation in individuals with and without disabilities. The search encompassed five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, medRxiv). Pooled estimates were calculated for each type of CRC screening and disability categories to synthesize the findings. The participation in CRC screening was derived using a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 20 articles were included, most of them from the USA. Based on pooled estimates, individuals with disabilities have lower odds of undergoing CRC screening versus those without disabilities (OR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.73-0.87). Analysis by screening type indicated that individuals with a disability have lower odds of a fecal occult blood test or a fecal immunochemical test (OR: 0.72, 95%CI 0.65-0.81), with no significant difference for a colonoscopy. Individuals with intellectual disabilities had significantly lower rates of CRC screening participation (OR = 0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.79), especially for FOBT/FIT (OR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.49-0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities exist for CRC screening participation in people with disabilities. Further research and coordinated efforts are essential to develop interventions for improving early cancer diagnosis for this non-negligible patient group.

Interaction of Insurance and Neighborhood Income on Operative Colorectal Cancer Outcomes Within a National Database

INTRODUCTION

Sociodemographic disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) surgical patients are known. Few studies, however, have examined the intersection of insurance type and median household income (MHI).

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample from 2000 to 2019, all CRC surgery patients between 50 and 64 y old were included. Patients were further stratified based on insurance type (commercial, Medicaid, and uninsured) as well as county-level MHI quartiles. Outcomes included nonelective surgery (primary outcome), inpatient mortality, complications, and blood transfusions. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for sociodemographic variables, medical comorbidities, and hospital-level factors.

RESULTS

Of 108,606 patients, 80.5% of patients had commercial insurance, while 5.8% were uninsured. On multivariate analysis, Medicaid or no insurance, especially when living in a lower-income community, were associated with significantly higher odds of nonelective surgery (ORs: 1.11-4.54). There was a stepwise effect on nonelective surgery by insurance type (uninsured with lower odds than insured) and MHI (each lower quartile had higher odds). There were similar trends for inpatient blood transfusions, but there were no significant differences in mortality or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Especially when considered together, noncommercial insurance and lower MHI were associated with worse outcomes in CRC patients. Insurance was more protective than MHI against worse outcomes. These findings among a screening-aged cohort have policy planning implications for insurance expansions and healthcare funding allocations. Further research is needed to understand the complex underlying mechanisms that create this interaction between insurance and MHI.

A Conduit for a Culturally Competent Consent: Medical Interpreters' Perspectives on Surgical Informed Consent Discussions

OBJECTIVE

To understand medical interpreters' perspectives on surgical informed consent discussions and provide feedback for surgeons on improving these conversations.

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is a critical component of patient-centered surgical decision-making. For patients with limited English proficiency, this conversation may be less thorough, even with a medical interpreter, leaving patients with an inadequate understanding of their diagnosis or treatment options.

METHODS

A semistructured interview guide was developed with input from interpreters and a qualitative research expert. We purposively sampled medical interpreters representing multiple languages until thematic saturation was achieved. Participants discussed their experience with the surgical consent discussion and process. Interview transcripts were analyzed using emergent thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among 22 interpreters, there were 10 languages represented and an average experience of 15 years (range: 4-40 yr). Four major themes were identified. First, interpreters consistently described their roles as patient advocates and cultural brokers. Second, interpreters reported unique patient attributes that influence the discussion, often based on patients' cultural values/expectations, anticipated decisional autonomy, and family support. Third, interpreters emphasized the importance of surgeons demonstrating compassion and patience, using simple terminology, conversing around the consent, providing context about the form/process, and initiating a pre-encounter discussion. Finally, interpreters suggested reducing legal terminology on consent forms and translation into other languages.

CONCLUSIONS

Experienced interpreters highlighted multiple factors associated with effective and culturally tailored informed consent discussions. Surgeons should recognize interpreters' critical and complex roles, be cognizant of cultural variations among patients with limited English proficiency, and improve interpersonal and communication skills to facilitate effective understanding.

Barriers to and facilitators of screening for cervical and breast cancer: Experiences of non-adherent women with current or previous drug use

Objective

Women with current or previous drug use (WCPDU) have an increased risk of poor cervical and breast cancer outcomes, and low participation in screening for these cancer forms. The aim of this study was to assess self-reported barriers to and facilitators of cervical and breast cancer screening, among WCPDU.

Methods

A survey based on results from a previous qualitative study about WCPDUs experiences of cancer screening was distributed to WCPDU at six opioid agonist treatment (OAT) clinics and one needle exchange program (NEP) in Malmö, Sweden, and through the Drug Users Union in Stockholm, Sweden. Data on barriers to and facilitators of cancer screening reported by 222 non-adherent WCPDU was analyzed by descriptive statistics. The barriers were structured according to an established model of healthcare access.

Results

The most frequently reported barriers to cervical as well as breast cancer screening were non-receipt of screening invitations (36 % and 25 %, respectively), trouble remembering the appointment (27 % and 30 %) and other priorities (26 % and 29 %). Common suggested facilitators for both cervical and breast cancer screening were screening access at, e.g., a NEP or OAT clinic (45 % and 40 %) and practical support to attend the screening appointment (40 % and 38 %).

Conclusions

In contrast to general population women, WCPDU report mainly practical barriers to cervical and breast cancer screening. However, NEP participants frequently reported experience of stigma and poor reception as barriers to screening. Interventions to minimize barriers to screening are crucial to decrease the increased cancer morbidity and mortality among WCPDU.