RESUMO
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Screening to detect polyps or cancer at an early stage has been shown to produce better outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC). Programs with a population-based approach can reach a large majority of the eligible population and can offer cost-effective interventions with the potential benefit of maximizing early cancer detection and prevention using a complete follow-up plan. The purpose of this review was to summarize the key features of population-based programs to increase CRC screening in the United States. A search was conducted in the SCOPUS, OvidSP, and PubMed databases. The authors selected published reports of population-based programs that met at least 5 of the 6 International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) criteria for cancer prevention and were known to the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Interventions at the level of individual practices were not included in this review. IARC cancer prevention criteria served as a framework to assess the effective processes and elements of a population-based program. Eight programs were included in this review. Half of the programs met all IARC criteria, and all programs led to improvements in screening rates. The rate of colonoscopy after a positive stool test was heterogeneous among programs. Different population-based strategies were used to promote these screening programs, including system-based, provider-based, patient-based, and media-based strategies. Treatment of identified cancer cases was not included explicitly in 4 programs but was offered through routine medical care. Evidence-based methods for promoting CRC screening at a population level can guide the development of future approaches in health care prevention. The key elements of a successful population-based approach include adherence to the 6 IARC criteria and 4 additional elements (an identified external funding source, a structured policy for positive fecal occult blood test results and confirmed cancer cases, outreach activities for recruitment and patient education, and an established rescreening process).
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Programas de Rastreamento , Colonoscopia , Neoplasias Colorretais/prevenção & controle , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Community health centers are uniquely positioned to address disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening as they have addressed other disparities. In 2012, the federal Health Resources and Services Administration, which is the funding agency for the health center program, added a requirement that health centers report CRC screening rates as a standard performance measure. These annually reported, publically available data are a major strategic opportunity to improve screening rates for CRC. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act enacted provisions to expand the capacity of the federal health center program. The recent report of the Institute of Medicine on integrating public health and primary care included an entire section devoted to CRC screening as a target for joint work. These developments make this the ideal time to integrate lifesaving CRC screening into the preventive care already offered by health centers. This article offers 5 strategies that address the challenges health centers face in increasing CRC screening rates. The first 2 strategies focus on improving the processes of primary care. The third emphasizes working productively with other medical providers and institutions. The fourth strategy is about aligning leadership. The final strategy is focused on using tools that have been derived from models that work. CA Cancer J Clin 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society, Inc.
RESUMO
A recent report from a survey of 15 primary care practices revealed considerable variability and much room for improvement in aspects of primary care practice that are associated with increased colorectal cancer screening rates. There was low utilization of patient reminders, tracking of test completion, rescheduling of missed appointments, and inconsistent follow-up of positive stool blood tests. Qualitative data collected in the same study provide insights into how the practices operated. Focus group discussions with the clinicians and staff of the practices and key informant interviews with office managers support the survey findings by shedding light on a lack of office policies and systems. Many practices lacked a systematic way to identify patients who were not up to date on screening while they were visiting the practice, thereby passing up the best opportunity to reach them. These findings are not consistent with the patient-centered medical home model.