Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct 2:11:E170.
doi: 10.5888/pcd11.140183.

Promotion and provision of colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of colorectal cancer control program grantees and nongrantees, 2011-2012

Affiliations

Promotion and provision of colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of colorectal cancer control program grantees and nongrantees, 2011-2012

Annette E Maxwell et al. Prev Chronic Dis. .

Abstract

Introduction: Since 2009, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has awarded nearly $95 million to 29 states and tribes through the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) to fund 2 program components: 1) providing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to uninsured and underinsured low-income adults and 2) promoting population-wide CRC screening through evidence-based interventions identified in the Guide to Community Preventive Services (Community Guide). CRCCP is a new model for disseminating and promoting use of evidence-based interventions. If the program proves successful, CDC may adopt the model for future cancer control programs. The objective of our study was to compare the colorectal cancer screening practices of recipients of CRCCP funding (grantees) with those of nonrecipients (nongrantees).

Methods: We conducted parallel Web-based surveys in 2012 with CRCCP grantees (N = 29) and nongrantees (N = 24) to assess promotion and provision of CRC screening, including the use of evidence-based interventions.

Results: CRCCP grantees were significantly more likely than nongrantees to use Community Guide-recommended evidence-based interventions (mean, 3.14 interventions vs 1.25 interventions, P < .001) and to use patient navigation services (eg, transportion or language translation services) (72% vs 17%, P < .001) for promoting CRC screening. Both groups were equally likely to use other strategies. CRCCP grantees were significantly more likely to provide CRC screening than were nongrantees (100% versus 50%, P < .001).

Conclusion: Results suggest that CRCCP funding and support increases use of evidence-based interventions to promote CRC screening, indicating the program's potential to increase population-wide CRC screening rates.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. US Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States cancer statistics: 1999–2010 incidence and mortality web-based report. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2013. http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/. Accessed February 12, 2014.
    1. Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Liles E, Beil TL, Fu R. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008;149(9):638–58. 10.7326/0003-4819-149-9-200811040-00245 - DOI - PubMed
    1. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer 2008. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf08/colocancer/colcanc.... Accessed March 4, 2014.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening test use — United States, 2012. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2013;62(44):881–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Townsend JS, Richardson LC, Steele CB, White DE. Evidence-based interventions and screening recommendations for colorectal cancer in comprehensive cancer control plans: a content analysis. Prev Chronic Dis 2009;6(4):A127 http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2009/Oct/pdf/08_0223.pdf Accessed March 4, 2014. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types