12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation.

          Methods

          This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase.

          Discussion

          There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study.

          Trial registration

          This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04514341) on 14 August 2020.

          Related collections

          Most cited references99

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cancer statistics, 2019

          Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

            Background Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. Methods We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. Results The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. Conclusion The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              An ecological approach to creating active living communities.

              The thesis of this article is that multilevel interventions based on ecological models and targeting individuals, social environments, physical environments, and policies must be implemented to achieve population change in physical activity. A model is proposed that identifies potential environmental and policy influences on four domains of active living: recreation, transport, occupation, and household. Multilevel research and interventions require multiple disciplines to combine concepts and methods to create new transdisciplinary approaches. The contributions being made by a broad range of disciplines are summarized. Research to date supports a conclusion that there are multiple levels of influence on physical activity, and the active living domains are associated with different environmental variables. Continued research is needed to provide detailed findings that can inform improved designs of communities, transportation systems, and recreation facilities. Collaborations with policy researchers may improve the likelihood of translating research findings into changes in environments, policies, and practices.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                hvallina@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu
                Journal
                Implement Sci
                Implement Sci
                Implementation Science : IS
                BioMed Central (London )
                1748-5908
                29 October 2020
                29 October 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 96
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.170205.1, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7822, Center for Asian Health Equity, , University of Chicago, ; 5841 S. Maryland Ave, MC1140, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.170205.1, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7822, University of Chicago Medicine Hematology and Oncology, ; 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.170205.1, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7822, Department of Public Health Sciences, , University of Chicago Biological Sciences, ; 5841 S. Maryland Ave, Rm W-254, MC2000, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.16753.36, ISNI 0000 0001 2299 3507, Division of General Internal Medicine & Geriatrics, Feinberg School of Medicine, , Northwestern University, ; 750 N. Lake Shore Dr., 10th Floor, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
                [5 ]GRID grid.170205.1, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7822, Department of Internal Medicine, Section of General Internal Medicine, , University of Chicago, ; 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3369-8658
                Article
                1045
                10.1186/s13012-020-01045-4
                7599111
                33121536
                ed95d7c6-263e-4726-b01e-232a42627e3a
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 1 September 2020
                : 10 September 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054, National Cancer Institute;
                Award ID: 5UH3CA233229-03
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Medicine
                colorectal cancer,multilevel intervention,stepped wedge design,implementation strategy,federally qualified health center,fqhc

                Comments

                Comment on this article