A Process Evaluation of the Alaska Native Colorectal Cancer Family Outreach Program

Clinical Outcomes from the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium Colorectal Cancer Control Program: 2009-2015

The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) participated in the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) from 2009 to 2015. We conducted a descriptive evaluation of ANTHC CRCCP demographics, quality measures, and clinical outcomes, including screening methods employed within the program and screening outcomes. There were 6981 program screenings completed, with the majority (81.3%) of people screened in the 50-75 year age group. Colonoscopy was the primary screening test used, accounting for 6704 (96.9%) of the screening tests. Quality of colonoscopy was high: adequate bowel preparation was reported in 98.2% of colonoscopies, cecal intubation rate was 98.9%, and the adenoma detection rate was 38.9%. A high proportion (58.9%) of colonoscopies had an initial finding of polyps or lesions suspicious for cancer; 41.2% of all colonoscopies had histological confirmation of either adenomatous polyps (40.6%) or cancer (0.5%). The ANTHC CRCCP successfully increased CRC screening among American Indian and Alaska Native peoples living in Alaska; this was achieved primarily through high-quality colonoscopy metrics. These data support a continued focus by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and its tribal health partners on increasing CRC screening and reducing cancer mortality among Alaska Native peoples.

The Alaska Native Tumour Registry: fifty years of cancer surveillance data for Alaska Native people

Like other Indigenous Circumpolar populations, Alaska Native (AN) people experience different patterns of cancer than their non-Indigenous counterparts. Every 5 years, the Alaska Native Tumour Registry releases a comprehensive report on cancer among AN people; this study provides 50 years of cancer surveillance data. Five-year annual-average age-adjusted incidence rates were calculated for time-periods ranging 1969-2018. AN data were compared with data for US whites (SEER 9). Mortality rates were calculated for 1994-2018 using data from the National Center for Health Statistics. During 2014-2018, there were 2,401 cases of invasive cancer among AN people. Among these, the most commonly diagnosed cancers were colorectal (405 cases, 17% of all cancers), lung and bronchus (373 cases, 16% of all cancers), and female breast (340 cases, 14% of all cancers). Lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer death, followed by colorectal and female breast cancers. These leading cancers are screenable, and preventable through lifestyle modifications including tobacco cessation, healthy eating and engaging in physical activity. These data provide important information to support cancer prevention and control among AN people. Cancer surveillance has been a valuable tool throughout the Circumpolar North to support reducing the burden of cancer among Indigenous populations.Abbreviations: ANAI: Alaska Native/American Indian; AN: Alaska Native; USW: U.S. White(s); ANMC: Alaska Native Medical Center; ANTR: Alaska Native Tumour Registry; IR: Incidence Rate; CI: Confidence Interval; RR: Rate Ratio; ICD-O-3: International Classification of Diseases for Oncology - Third Edition; SEER: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results.

Outcomes reported in evaluations of programs designed to improve health in Indigenous people

OBJECTIVE

To assess the outcomes reported and measured in evaluations of complex health interventions in Indigenous communities.

DATA SOURCES

We searched all publications indexed in MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EconLit, and CINAHL until January 2020 and reference lists from included papers were hand-searched for additional articles.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We included all primary studies, published in peer-reviewed journals, where the main objective was to evaluate a complex health intervention developed specifically for an Indigenous community residing in a high-income country. Only studies published in English were included. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted and summarized.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Of the 3523 publications retrieved, 62 evaluation studies were included from Australia, the United States, Canada, and New Zealand. Most studies involved less than 100 participants and were mainly adults. We identified outcomes across 13 domains: clinical, behavioral, process-related, economic, quality of life, knowledge/awareness, social, empowerment, access, environmental, attitude, trust, and community. Evaluations using quantitative methods primarily measured outcomes from the clinical and behavioral domains, while the outcomes reported in the qualitative studies were mostly from the process-related and empowerment domains.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes from qualitative evaluations, which better reflect the impact of the intervention on participant health, remain different from the outcomes routinely measured in quantitative evaluations. Measuring the outcomes from qualitative evaluations alongside outcomes from quantitative evaluations could result in more relevant evaluations to inform decision making in Indigenous health.

Growing Disparity in the Incidence of Colorectal Cancer among Non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native Populations-United States, 2013-2017

BACKGROUND

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations have experienced regional variation and disparities in colorectal cancer incidence rates.

METHODS

We examined colorectal cancer incidence (2013-2017) and colorectal cancer incidence trends (1999-2017) among AI/AN persons. Incidence data were linked to Indian Health Service enrollment records, and analyses were restricted to Purchased/Referred Care Delivery Areas. Incidence rates of colorectal cancer among AI/AN and White persons were analyzed in six geographic regions; Hispanic persons were excluded. Incidence trends were analyzed using linear modeling.

RESULTS

During 2013-2017, colorectal cancer incidence was 41% higher among AI/AN than among White persons. AI/AN incidence rates per 100,000 varied regionally from 34.4 in the East to 96.1 in Alaska. Compared with White persons, AI/AN persons had higher colorectal cancer incidence rates among all age strata and were more likely to have late-stage diagnoses. Incidence rate trends indicated significant increases among both AI/AN and White persons ages <50 years and among AI/AN persons ages 50-64 years. The colorectal cancer incidence rate trend increased among AI/AN persons in the Southwest.

CONCLUSIONS

The disparity of colorectal cancer incidence rates between AI/AN and White persons has widened since 2005-2009. AI/AN populations have higher colorectal cancer incidence compared with White populations, especially in the Alaska region.

IMPACT

Our finding of increased colorectal cancer incidence disparities suggests that enhanced screening efforts and culturally appropriate clinical and public health interventions are needed among AI/AN persons overall, and especially in regions and age groups in which colorectal cancer rates are increasing.

Factors Associated With Colorectal Cancer Screening Among First-Degree Relatives of Patients With Colorectal Cancer in China

BACKGROUND

First-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer have an elevated risk of colorectal cancer. However, the behavior and factors potential influencing first-degree relatives regarding colorectal cancer screening in China remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the screening behavior and related factors of first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional design was applied, and 201 first-degree relatives participated from August 2018 to July 2019. Data were collected about demographic information, the "Colorectal Cancer Perceptions Scale," and screening behavior of first-degree relatives. Factors associated with screening behavior were identified using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Only 18.9% of first-degree relatives had participated in colonoscopy screening. Two Health Belief Model factors were the influencing factors of their participation in colorectal cancer screening. Higher possibility of colorectal cancer screening of first-degree relatives was associated with higher perceived susceptibility (odds ratio, 1.224; 95% confidence interval, 1.075-1.395) and lower perception of barriers (odds ratio, 0.880; 95% confidence interval, 0.820-0.944) of first-degree relatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in colorectal cancer screening by first-degree relatives requires improvement; perceived susceptibility and perception of barriers were the most important predictors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Health professionals can enhance awareness of colorectal cancer susceptibility and address barriers to colorectal cancer screening among first-degree relatives at both individual and social levels.

Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation and impact of Indigenous health interventions: A systematic review of qualitative studies

Background

Evaluations of health interventions for Indigenous peoples rarely report outcomes that reflect participant and community perspectives of their experiences. Inclusion of such data may provide a fuller picture of the impact of health programmes and improve the usefulness of evaluation assessments.

Aim

To describe stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation and impact of Indigenous health programmes.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies evaluating complex health interventions designed for Indigenous communities in high‐income countries. We searched 6 electronic databases (through to January 2020): MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL and hand‐searched reference lists of relevant articles.

Results

From 28 studies involving 677 stakeholders (mostly clinical staff and participants), six main themes were identified: enabling engagement, regaining control of health, improving social health and belonging, preserving community and culture, cultivating hope for a better life, and threats to long‐term programme viability.

Conclusion

The prominence of social, emotional and spiritual well‐being as important aspects of the health journey for participants in this review highlights the need to reframe evaluations of health programmes implemented in Indigenous communities away from assessments that focus on commonly used biomedical measures. Evaluators, in consultation with the community, should consistently assess the capacity of health professionals to meet community needs and expectations throughout the life of the programme. Evaluations that include qualitative data on participant and community‐level outcomes can improve decision‐makers' understanding of the impact that health programmes have on communities.

Patient or public contribution

This paper is a review of evaluation studies and did not involve patients or the public.

Effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Among American Indians and Alaska Natives

INTRODUCTION

Screening rates for colorectal cancer are low in many American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities. Direct mailing of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit can address patient and structural barriers to screening. Our objective was to determine if such an evidence-based intervention could increase colorectal cancer screening among AI/AN populations.

METHODS

We recruited study participants from 3 tribally operated health care facilities and randomly assigned them to 1 of 3 study groups: 1) usual care, 2) mailing of FIT kits, and 3) mailing of FIT kits plus follow-up outreach by telephone and/or home visit from an American Indian Community Health Representative (CHR).

RESULTS

Among participants who received usual care, 6.4% returned completed FIT kits. Among participants who were mailed FIT kits without outreach, 16.9% returned the kits - a significant increase over usual care (P < .01). Among participants who received mailed FIT kits plus CHR outreach, 18.8% returned kits, which was also a significant increase over usual care (P < .01) but not a significant increase compared with the mailed FIT kit-only group (P = .44). Of 165 participants who returned FIT kits during the study, 39 (23.6%) had a positive result and were referred for colonoscopy of which 23 (59.0%) completed the colonoscopy. Twelve participants who completed a colonoscopy had polyps, and 1 was diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Direct mailing of FIT kits to eligible community members may be a useful, population-based strategy to increase colorectal cancer screening among AI/AN people.

Culturally competent healthcare - A scoping review of strategies implemented in healthcare organizations and a model of culturally competent healthcare provision

Background

Culturally and linguistically diverse patients access healthcare services less than the host populations and are confronted with different barriers such as language barriers, legal restrictions or differences in health beliefs. In order to reduce these disparities, the promotion of cultural competence in healthcare organizations has been a political goal. This scoping review aims to collect components and strategies from evaluated interventions that provide culturally competent healthcare for culturally and linguistically diverse patients within healthcare organizations and to examine their effects on selected outcome measures. Thereafter, we aim to organize identified components into a model of culturally competent healthcare provisions.

Methods and findings

A systematic literature search was carried out using three databases (Pubmed, PsycINFO and Web of Science) to identify studies which have implemented and evaluated cultural competence interventions in healthcare facilities. PICO criteria were adapted to formulate the research question and to systematically choose relevant search terms. Sixty-seven studies implementing culturally competent healthcare interventions were included in the final synthesis. Identified strategies and components of culturally competent healthcare extracted from these studies were clustered into twenty categories, which were organized in four groups: Components of culturally competent healthcare–Individual level; Components of culturally competent healthcare–Organizational level; Strategies to implement culturally competent healthcare and Strategies to provide access to culturally competent healthcare. A model integrating the results is proposed. The overall effects on patient outcomes and utilization rates of identified components or strategies were positive but often small or not significant. Qualitative data suggest that components and strategies of culturally competent healthcare were appreciated by patients and providers.

Conclusion

This scoping review used a bottom-up approach to identify components and strategies of culturally competent healthcare interventions and synthesized the results in a model of culturally competent healthcare provision. Reported effects of single components or strategies are limited because most studies implemented a combination of different components and strategies simultaneously.