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
. 2021 Jun;37(3):585-601.
doi: 10.1111/jrh.12522. Epub 2020 Oct 7.

A Multilevel Approach to Understand the Context and Potential Solutions for Low Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates in Rural Appalachia Clinics

Jamie Zoellner  1 , Kathleen Porter  1 , Esther Thatcher  1 , Erin Kennedy  1 , James L Werth Jr  2   3 , Betsy Grossman  1 , Tomas Roatsey  2 , Heather Hamilton  2 , Roger Anderson  1 , Wendy Cohn  1
Affiliations

A Multilevel Approach to Understand the Context and Potential Solutions for Low Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates in Rural Appalachia Clinics

Jamie Zoellner et al. J Rural Health. 2021 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: To explore system/staff- and patient-level opportunities to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening within an 11-clinic Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in rural Appalachia with CRC screening rates around 22%-30%.

Methods: Using a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, staff (n = 26) and patients (n = 60, age 50-75, 67% female, 83% <college, 47% Medicare, 23% Medicaid) were interviewed about CRC-related screening practices. Staff and patient interviews were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Health Belief Model, respectively, and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach.

Results: Among staff, inner setting factors that could promote CRC screening included high workplace satisfaction, experiences tracking other cancer screenings, and a highly active Performance Improvement Committee. Inner setting hindering factors included electronic medical record inefficiencies and requiring patients to physically return fecal tests to the clinic. Outer setting CRC screening promoting factors included increased Medicaid access, support from outside organizations, and reporting requirements to external regulators, while hindering factors included poor social determinants of health, inadequate colonoscopy access, and lack of patient compliance. Among patients, perceived screening benefits were rated relatively higher than barriers. Top barriers included cost, no symptoms, fear, and transportation. Patients reported high likelihood of getting a stool-based test and colonoscopy if recommended, yet self-efficacy to prevent CRC was considerably lower.

Conclusions: Contextualized perceptions of barriers and practical opportunities to improve CRC screening rates were identified among staff and patients. To optimize multilevel CRC screening interventions in rural Appalachia clinics, future quality improvement, research, and policy efforts are needed to address identified challenges.

Keywords: cancer early detection; colorectal cancer; community health centers; health status disparities; implementation science.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Colorectal Cancer Facts & Figures 2017–2019. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2017. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-.... Accessed April 20, 2019.
    1. Whitlock EP, Lin J, Liles E, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: An updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence syntheses, formerly systematic evidence reviews. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008. - PubMed
    1. American Cancer Society. National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable: Working toward the Shared Goal of 80% Screened for Colorectal Cancer by 2018. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2018. Available at: http://nccrt.org/what-we-do/80-percent-by-2018/. Accessed April 20, 2019.
    1. Zauber AG. The impact of screening on colorectal cancer mortality and incidence: has it really made a difference? Dig Dis Sci. 2015;60(3):681–691. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Henley SJ, Anderson RN, Thomas CC, Massetti GM, Peaker B, Richardson LC. Invasive cancer incidence, 2004–2013, and deaths, 2006–2015, in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan counties—United States. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017;66(14):1–13. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types