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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 May;39(7):1188-1195.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08654-5. Epub 2024 Feb 8.

Bundling Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach with Screening for Social Risk in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Stepped-Wedge Implementation-Effectiveness Study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Bundling Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach with Screening for Social Risk in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Stepped-Wedge Implementation-Effectiveness Study

Gina R Kruse et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2024 May.

Abstract

Background: Bundling is combining individual interventions to meet quality metrics. Bundling offers of cancer screening with screening for social determinants of health (SDOH) may enable health centers to assist patients with social risks and yield efficiencies.

Objective: To measure effects of bundling fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and SDOH screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).

Design: Clustered stepped-wedge trial.

Participants: Four Massachusetts FQHCs randomized to implement bundled FIT-SDOH over 8-week "steps."

Intervention: Outreach to 50-75-year-olds overdue for CRC screening to offer FIT with SDOH screening. The implementation strategy used facilitation and training for data monitoring and reporting.

Main measures: Implementation process descriptions, data from facilitation meetings, and CRC and SDOH screening rates. Rates were compared between implementation and control FQHCs in each "step" by fitting generalized linear mixed-effects models with random intercepts for FQHCs, patients, and "step" by FQHC.

Key results: FQHCs tailored implementation processes to their infrastructure, workflows, and staffing and prioritized different groups for outreach. Two FQHCs used population health outreach, and two integrated FIT-SDOH within established programs, such as pre-visit planning. Of 34,588 patients overdue for CRC screening, 54% were female; 20% Black, 11% Latino, 10% Asian, and 47% white; 32% had Medicaid, 16% Medicare, 32% private insurance, and 11% uninsured. Odds of CRC screening completion in implementation "steps" compared to controls were higher overall and among groups prioritized for outreach (overall: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.41, p = 0.005; prioritized: aOR 2.88, p = 0.002). Odds of SDOH screening did not differ across "steps."

Conclusions: As healthcare systems are required to conduct more screenings, it is notable that outreach for a long-standing cancer screening requirement increased screening, even when bundled with a newer screening requirement. This outreach was feasible in a real-world safety-net clinical population and may conserve resources, especially compared to more complex or intensive outreach strategies.

Clinical trials registration: NCT04585919.

Keywords: colorectal cancer; community health centers; implementation science.; screening; social determinants of health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

GK has a family financial interest in Dimagi, Inc., and received a research grant from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network/Astra Zeneca. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Intervention elements.

References

    1. Emmons KM, Colditz GA. Realizing the Potential of Cancer Prevention - The Role of Implementation Science. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(10):986–990. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb1609101. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hall IJ, Tangka FKL, Sabatino SA, Thompson TD, Graubard BI, Breen N. Patterns and Trends in Cancer Screening in the United States. Prev Chronic Dis. 2018;15:E97. doi: 10.5888/pcd15.170465. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Colditz GA, Wolin KY, Gehlert S. Applying what we know to accelerate cancer prevention. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(127):127rv4. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3003218. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tehranifar P, Neugut AI, Phelan JC, et al. Medical advances and racial/ethnic disparities in cancer survival. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18(10):2701–2708. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0305. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Phelan JC, Link BG, Diez-Roux A, Kawachi I, Levin B. "Fundamental causes" of social inequalities in mortality: a test of the theory. J Health Soc Behav. 2004;45(3):265–285. doi: 10.1177/002214650404500303. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data