{"id":2622,"date":"2008-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/news.christianacare.org\/2008\/09\/tailored-navigation-in-colorectal-cancer-screening\/"},"modified":"2021-12-13T21:20:23","modified_gmt":"2021-12-13T21:20:23","slug":"tailored-navigation-in-colorectal-cancer-screening","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/2008\/09\/01\/tailored-navigation-in-colorectal-cancer-screening\/","title":{"rendered":"Tailored navigation in colorectal cancer screening"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Myers RE, Hyslop T, Sifri R, Bittner-Fagan H, Katurakes NC, Cocroft J, Dicarlo M, Wolf T<\/p>\n<p>Med Care 2008 Sep;46(9 Suppl 1):S123-31<\/p>\n<p>PMID: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/18725824\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">18725824<\/a><\/p>\n<h2>Abstract<\/h2>\n<p><p><strong>BACKGROUND: <\/strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized. Effective methods to increase screening use are needed. This study sought to determine the impact of tailored navigation on CRC screening in primary care.<\/p>\n<p><strong>METHODS: <\/strong>The study included 154 primary care practice patients who were 50 or more years of age, were eligible for CRC screening, and had an office visit within 2 years before study initiation. Baseline telephone survey data were collected on participant sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, and screening test [fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or colonoscopy] decision stage. By comparing decision stage data, we identified that test with the highest decision stage (ie, preferred screening test). Participants who preferred FOBT were sent an FOBT kit and a reminder. Those preferring colonoscopy were sent colonoscopy instructions. After this mailing, a study patient navigator made a telephone call to guide participants towards screening. Six-month end point survey and medical records data were obtained. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of screening and of change in preferred screening test decision stage.<\/p>\n<p><strong>RESULTS: <\/strong>At end point, 63 (41%) study participants had screened. From baseline to end point, overall screening preference increased for 75 (63%) participants. Age and perceived salience and coherence (ie, screening is important and sensible) were positive, significant predictors of screening use (P = 0.02 and P = 0.05, respectively); while only age predicted change in overall screening preference (P = 0.03).<\/p>\n<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: <\/strong>Study participant screening use and preference increased. Age and attitudes predicted outcomes. Randomized trials are needed to determine intervention impact at the population level.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Myers RE, Hyslop T, Sifri R, Bittner-Fagan H, Katurakes NC, Cocroft J, Dicarlo M, Wolf T Med Care 2008 Sep;46(9 Suppl 1):S123-31 PMID: 18725824 Abstract BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized. Effective methods to increase screening use are needed. This study sought to determine the impact of tailored navigation on CRC screening in primary<\/p>\n<p><a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/2008\/09\/01\/tailored-navigation-in-colorectal-cancer-screening\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Tailored navigation in colorectal cancer screening<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2622","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ireach","category-pubs-pres"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2622","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2622"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2622\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2622"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2622"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.christianacare.org\/publications\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2622"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}