Health literacy-listening skill and patient questions following cancer prevention and screening discussions.

OBJECTIVE: Patient question-asking is essential to shared decision making. We sought to describe patients' questions when faced with cancer prevention and screening decisions, and to explore differences in question-asking as a function of health literacy with respect to spoken information (health literacy-listening). METHODS: Four-hundred and thirty-three (433) adults listened to simulated physician-patient interactions discussing (i) prophylactic tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention, (ii) PSA testing for prostate cancer and (iii) colorectal cancer screening, and identified questions they would have. Health literacy-listening was assessed using the Cancer Message Literacy Test-Listening (CMLT-Listening). Two authors developed a coding scheme, which was applied to all questions. Analyses examined whether participants scoring above or below the median on the CMLT-Listening asked a similar variety of questions. RESULTS: Questions were coded into six major function categories: risks/benefits, procedure details, personalizing information, additional information, decision making and credibility. Participants who scored higher on the CMLT-Listening asked a greater variety of risks/benefits questions; those who scored lower asked a greater variety of questions seeking to personalize information. This difference persisted after adjusting for education. CONCLUSION: Patients' health literacy-listening is associated with distinctive patterns of question utilization following cancer screening and prevention counselling. Providers should not only be responsive to the question functions the patient favours, but also seek to ensure that the patient is exposed to the full range of information needed for shared decision making.

The association between health literacy and cancer-related attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge.

Using a multidimensional assessment of health literacy (the Cancer Message Literacy Test-Listening, the Cancer Message Literacy Test-Reading, and the Lipkus Numeracy Scale), the authors assessed a stratified random sample of 1013 insured adults (40-70 years of age). The authors explored whether low health literacy across all 3 domains (n =111) was associated with sets of variables likely to affect engagement in cancer prevention and screening activities: (a) attitudes and behaviors relating to health care encounters and providers, (b) attitudes toward cancer and health, (c) knowledge of cancer screening tests, and (d) attitudes toward health related media and actual media use. Adults with low health literacy were more likely to report avoiding doctor's visits, to have more fatalistic attitudes toward cancer, to be less accurate in identifying the purpose of cancer screening tests, and more likely to avoid information about diseases they did not have. Compared with other participants, those with lower health literacy were more likely to say that they would seek information about cancer prevention or screening from a health care professional and less likely to turn to the Internet first for such information. Those with lower health literacy reported reading on fewer days and using the computer on fewer days than did other participants. The authors assessed the association of low health literacy with colorectal cancer screening in an age-appropriate subgroup for which colorectal cancer screening is recommended. In these insured subjects receiving care in integrated health care delivery systems, those with low health literacy were less likely to be up to date on screening for colorectal cancer, but the difference was not statistically significant.

Design and methods for a randomized clinical trial comparing three outreach efforts to improve screening mammography adherence.

BACKGROUND: Despite the demonstrated need to increase screening mammography utilization and strong evidence that mail and telephone outreach to women can increase screening, most managed care organizations have not adopted comprehensive outreach programs. The uncertainty about optimum strategies and cost effectiveness have retarded widespread acceptance. While 70% of women report getting a mammogram within the prior 2 years, repeat mammography rates are less than 50%. This 5-year study is conducted though a Central Massachusetts healthcare plan and affiliated clinic. All women have adequate health insurance to cover the test. METHODS/DESIGN: This randomized study compares 3 arms: reminder letter alone; reminder letter plus reminder call; reminder letter plus a second reminder and booklet plus a counselor call. All calls provide women with the opportunity to schedule a mammogram in a reasonable time. The invention period will span 4 years and include repeat attempts. The counselor arm is designed to educate, motivate and counsel women in an effort to alleviate PCP burden.All women who have been in the healthcare plan for 24 months and who have a current primary care provider (PCP) and who are aged 51-84 are randomized to 1 of 3 arms. Interventions are limited to women who become ≥ 18 months from a prior mammogram. Women and their physicians may opt out of the intervention study.Measurement of completed mammograms will use plan billing records and clinic electronic records. The primary outcome is the proportion of women continuously enrolled for ≥ 24 months who have had ≥ 1 mammogram in the last 24 months. Secondary outcomes include the number of women who need repeat interventions. The cost effectiveness analysis will measure all costs from the provider perspective. DISCUSSION: So far, 18,509 women aged 51-84 have been enrolled into our tracking database and were randomized into one of three arms. At baseline, 5,223 women were eligible for an intervention. We anticipate that the outcome will provide firm data about the maximal effectiveness as well as the cost effectiveness of the interventions both for increasing the mammography rate and the repeat mammography rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT01332032.

Media messages about cancer: what do people understand?

Health messages on television and other mass media have the potential to significantly influence the public's health-related knowledge and behaviors, but little is known about people's ability to comprehend such messages. To investigate whether people understood the spoken information in media messages about cancer prevention and screening, we recruited 44 adults from 3 sites to view 6 messages aired on television and the internet. Participants were asked to paraphrase main points and selected phrases. Qualitative analysis methods were used to identify what content was correctly and accurately recalled and paraphrased, and to describe misunderstandings and misconceptions. While most participants accurately recalled and paraphrased the gist of the messages used here, overgeneralization (e.g., believing preventative behaviors to be more protective than stated), loss of details (e.g., misremembering the recommended age for screening), and confusion or misunderstandings around specific concepts (e.g., interpreting "early stage" as the stage in one's life rather than cancer stage) were common. Variability in the public's ability to understand spoken media messages may limit the effectiveness of both pubic health campaigns and provider-patient communication. Additional research is needed to identify message characteristics that enhance understandability and improve comprehension of spoken media messages about cancer.

Comparing Telephone Counseling With Reminding to Promote On-Time Repeated Mammography: A Randomized Trial in a Cohort With 4 Years Follow-Up.

Background. Long-term continuous adherence to biennial screening mammograms as guidelines recommend remains low. Limited evidence suggests that reminder calls may increase short-term adherence as much as telephone counseling, but research is needed comparing the long-term effects of these two approaches. Purpose. To compare the impacts of two telephone outreach interventions and mailed reminders on 4-year continuous mammography adherence. Method. A cohort of 3,215 women, age 50 to 81 years, was selected from 30,160 women from a 4-year randomized trial of three interventions to promote biennial mammography: reminder letter only (LO), letter plus reminder call (RC), and two letters plus educational material and a counseling call (CC). Women selected remained eligible for the trial all 4 years and received annual interventions as needed. The proportion with a mammogram in the last 24 months was determined at baseline and four annual time points. Results. Continuous adherence at all four time points was higher in the RC (78.8%) and CC arms (78.8%) than in the LO arm (75.1%; p < .001). Multivariable analysis confirmed this finding: CC (odds ratio = 1.27; 95% confidence interval = [1.01, 1.61]) and RC (odds ratio = 1.23; 95% confidence interval = [0.98, 1.56]). Only 27.8% of women eligible for an initial counseling call actually received counseling. Conclusions. Compared with letters alone, outreach calls can modestly increase continuous mammography adherence among insured women with consistent primary care. Telephone counseling was no more effective than a reminder call, possibly due to limited acceptance of counseling calls by women who may find them unwelcome or unnecessary.

Moving mammogram-reluctant women to screening: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Effective interventions are needed for women long overdue for screening mammography. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to pilot test an intervention for motivating overdue women to receive a mammogram. METHODS: Subjects aged 45-79 without a mammogram in > or =27 months and enrolled in study practices were identified from claims data. The intervention included a mailed, educational booklet, computer-assisted barrier-specific tailored counseling and motivational interviewing, and facilitated, short-interval mammography scheduling. RESULTS: Of 127 eligible women, 45 (35.4%) agreed to counseling and data collection. Most were > or =3 years overdue. Twenty-six (57.8%) of the counseled women got a mammogram within 12 months. Thirty-one (72.1%) of 43 counseled women moved > or =1 stage closer to screening, based on a modified Precaution Adoption Process Model. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to reach and counsel women who are long overdue for a mammogram and to advance their stage of adoption. The intervention should be formally evaluated in a prospective trial comparing it to control or to proven interventions.

A 4-year randomized trial comparing three outreach interventions to promote screening mammograms.

As population health has become a focus of health care payers and providers, interest has grown in mail, phone, and other forms of outreach for improving population rates of cancer screening. Translational research is needed to compare the effectiveness and cost of low- and high-intensity behavioral outreach interventions for promoting cancer screening. The purpose of the article is to compare the effectiveness in promoting biannual mammograms of three interventions delivered over 4 years to a primary care population with a high baseline mammography adherence of 83.3%. We randomized women aged 40-84 to reminder letter only (LO arm), letter + reminder call (RC arm), and two letters + counseling call (CC arm) involving tailored education and motivational interviewing. Mammography adherence (≥1 mammogram in the previous 24 months) at four time points was determined from insurance claims records. Over 4 years, 30,162 women were randomized. At the end of 4 years, adherence was highest in the RC arm (83.0%) compared with CC (80.8%) and LO (80.8%) arms (p = .03). Only 23.5% of women in the CC arm were reached and accepted full counseling. The incremental cost per additional mammogram for RC arm women was $30.45 over the LO arm cost. A simple reminder call can increase screening mammogram adherence even when baseline adherence is high. Some more complex behavioral interventions delivered by mail and phone as in this study may be less effective, due to limited participation of patients, a focus on ambivalence, lack of follow-up, and other factors.

Staging mammography nonadherent women: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have related stages of mammography screening nonadherence with the rationale used by overdue women. METHODS: We used a grounded theory approach to obtain and analyze data from focus groups, telephone interviews, and surveys. Emergent specific themes were compared with emerging decision levels of nonadherence. Each decision level was then compared with the Precaution Adoption Process Model and the Transtheoretical Model. RESULTS: A total of 6 key themes influencing mammogram nonadherence emerged as did 6 decision levels. Variability within themes was associated with specific decision levels. The decision levels were not adequately classified by either stage model. CONCLUSIONS: Stage-based educational strategies may benefit by tailoring interventions to these 6 decision levels.

Implementation and process evaluation of three interventions to promote screening mammograms delivered for 4 years in a large primary care population.

The optimal form of outreach to promote repeated, on time screening mammograms in primary care has not been established. The purpose of this study is to assess the implementation process and process outcomes for three interventions for promoting biannual screening mammography in a randomized trial. In a large urban primary care practice over a 4-year period, we randomized women aged 40-85 and eligible for mammograms to three interventions: reminder letter only (LO), reminder letter + reminder call (RC), and reminder letter + counseling call (CC). We tracked information system development, staff training, patient and provider recruitment, reach, dose delivered and received, fidelity, and context measures. Ninety-three of 95 providers approved participation by 80% (23,999) of age-eligible patients, of whom only 207 (0.9%) opted not to receive any intervention. Of 9161 initial reminder letters mailed to women coming due or overdue for mammograms, 0.8% were undeliverable. Of women in the RC and CC arms unresponsive to the first reminder letter (n = 3982), 71.4% were called and reached, and of those, 49.1% scheduled a mammogram. Only 33.4% of women reached in the CC arm received full counseling, and women in the CC arm were less likely to schedule a mammogram than those in the RC arm. Implementing mail and telephone mammography reminders is feasible and acceptable in a large urban practice and reaches a majority of patients. Many schedule a mammogram when reached. A reminder letter followed by a simple reminder call if needed may be the optimal approach to promoting screening mammograms.

Implementing a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system to increase colorectal cancer screening: a process evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) systems used by telephone counselors (TCs) may be efficient mechanisms to counsel patients on cancer and recommended preventive screening tests in order to extend a primary care provider's reach to his/her patients. The implementation process of such a system for promoting colorectal (CRC) cancer screening using a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system is reported in this paper. METHODS: The process evaluation assessed three components of the intervention: message production, program implementation and audience reception. RESULTS: Of 1181 potentially eligible patients, 1025 (87%) patients were reached by the TCs and 725 of those patients (71%) were eligible to receive counseling. Five hundred eighty-two (80%) patients agreed to counseling. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to design and use CATI systems for prevention counseling of patients in primary care practices. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: CATI systems have the potential of being used as a referral service by primary care providers and health care organizations for patient education.

Referring patients for telephone counseling to promote colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of a telephone counseling intervention promoting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening when patients are referred for counseling by primary care providers (PCPs). STUDY DESIGN: Interventional cohort study with no formal control group. METHODS: PCPs in 3 practices were prompted to address CRC screening in patient encounters and, if appropriate, to recommend referral for telephone counseling. A telephone counselor called referred patients, made an appointment for a counseling call, and mailed an educational booklet to patients. Counseling included education about CRC and screening tests, motivational interviewing, barrier counseling, and facilitated referral for colonoscopy or mailing of a fecal occult blood testing kit. About 7 months following counseling, electronic records were searched for evidence of colonoscopy. RESULTS: PCPs addressed CRC screening with 1945 patients, most of whom were up-to-date with CRC testing, recommended counseling referral to 362, and of these 180 (49.7%) accepted the referral. A total of 140 (77.8%) of referred patients were contacted and 67 (37.2%) received counseling. After counseling 93.9% were planning on CRC screening compared with 54.6% at the beginning of the call. Of those planning a colonoscopy, 53.2% received one within 7 months. CONCLUSIONS: Referring patients for telephone counseling to promote CRC screening may be feasible and acceptable to PCPs and to some patients, and may increase CRC screening. Further evaluation of the intervention may be warranted to compare the rate of screening associated with the intervention to rates related to usual care and to other interventions.

The Cancer Message Literacy Tests: psychometric analyses and validity studies.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychometric properties of two new health literacy tests, and to evaluate score validity. METHODS: Adults aged 40-71 completed the Cancer Message Literacy Test-Listening (CMLT-Listening), the Cancer Message Literacy Test-Reading (CMLT-Reading), the REALM, the Lipkus numeracy test, a brief knowledge test (developed for this study) and five brief cognitive tests. Participants also self-reported educational achievement, current health, reading ability, ability to understand spoken information, and language spoken at home. RESULTS: Score reliabilities were good (CMLT-Listening: alpha=.84) to adequate (CMLT-Reading: alpha=.75). Scores on both CMLT tests were positively and significantly correlated with scores on the REALM, numeracy, cancer knowledge and the cognitive tests. Mean CMLT scores varied as predicted according to educational level, language spoken at home, self-rated health, self-reported reading, and self-rated ability to comprehend spoken information. CONCLUSION: The psychometric findings for both tests are promising. Scores appear to be valid indicators of comprehension of spoken and written health messages about cancer prevention and screening. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The CMLT-Listening will facilitate research into comprehension of spoken health messages, and together with the CMLT-Reading will allow researchers to examine the unique contributions of listening and reading comprehension to health-related decisions and behaviors.

Health literacy and cancer prevention: two new instruments to assess comprehension.

OBJECTIVES: Ability to understand spoken health information is an important facet of health literacy, but to date, no instrument has been available to quantify patients' ability in this area. We sought to develop a test to assess comprehension of spoken health messages related to cancer prevention and screening to fill this gap, and a complementary test of comprehension of written health messages. METHODS: We used the Sentence Verification Technique to write items based on realistic health messages about cancer prevention and screening, including media messages, clinical encounters and clinical print materials. Items were reviewed, revised, and pre-tested. Adults aged 40-70 participated in a pilot administration in Georgia, Hawaii, and Massachusetts. RESULTS: The Cancer Message Literacy Test-Listening is self-administered via touchscreen laptop computer. No reading is required. It takes approximately 1 hour. The Cancer Message Literacy Test-Reading is self-administered on paper. It takes approximately 10min. CONCLUSIONS: These two new tests will allow researchers to assess comprehension of spoken health messages, to examine the relationship between listening and reading literacy, and to explore the impact of each form of literacy on health-related outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Researchers and clinicians now have a means of measuring comprehension of spoken health information.

Helping men make an informed decision about prostate cancer screening: a pilot study of telephone counseling.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate a computer-assisted telephone counseling (CATC) decision aid for men considering a prostate specific antigen (PSA) test. METHODS: Eligible men were invited by their primary care providers (PCPs) to participate. Those consenting received an educational booklet followed by CATC. The counselor assessed stage of readiness, reviewed booklet information, corrected knowledge deficits and helped with a values clarification exercise. The materials presented advantages and disadvantages of being screened and did not advocate for testing or for not testing. Outcome measures included changes in stage, decisional conflict, decisional satisfaction, perceived vulnerability and congruence of a PSA testing decision with a pros/cons score. Baseline and final surveys were administered by telephone. RESULTS: There was an increase in PSA knowledge (p<0.001), and in decisional satisfaction (p<0.001), a decrease in decisional conflict (p<0.001), and a general consistency of those decisions with the man's values. Among those initially who had not made a decision, 83.1% made a decision by final survey with decisions equally for or against screening. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention provides realistic, unbiased and effective decision support for men facing a difficult and confusing decision. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our intervention could potentially replace a discussion of PSA testing with the PCP for most men.

Using tailored telephone counseling to accelerate the adoption of colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Few interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening have used a stage of change model to promote screening adoption. None have used computer-assisted tailored telephone counseling calls. This study's purpose was to implement and evaluate stage-based computer-assisted tailored telephone counseling to promote colorectal cancer screening in a primary care population. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial used a two-stepped intervention that included a mailed booklet on colorectal cancer screening followed by computer-assisted telephone counseling that was based on the Precaution Adoption Process Model. Chart audit was used to document completion of colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy or fecal occult blood testing. RESULTS: Record audits were completed on 2,474 (88%) of the 2,817 eligible participants. There was no significant difference in the frequency and nature of the screening tests completed in the study arms. In a sub-analysis, stages of adoption were evaluated pre- and post-telephone counseling. Over half those receiving counseling reported a change in stage towards screening adoption. CONCLUSION: Overall, the intervention did not increase colorectal screening compared to control. Two possible reasons for the absence of a screening effect include: (a) the focus of the protocol on education for most patients rather than motivation, and (b) the requirement that patients interested in screening seek further information and a referral on their own from their providers. While those receiving telephone counseling improved their stage of adoption, we cannot rule out selection bias. Stronger physician recommendation to speak with the counselors could improve call acceptance. Future colorectal screening should address these weaknesses.

Factors associated with colorectal cancer risk perception: the role of polyps and family history.

It is unclear how objective risk factors influence the factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) risk perception. The goals of this study were to investigate factors associated with perceived risk of CRC and to explore how these relationships were modified by personal history of polyps or family history of CRC. The study involved a mailed questionnaire completed by 1646 men and women aged 50-75 years, which assessed perceived risk, demographic and health history variables and CRC worry. Participants were patients of primary care providers in a community medical group in central Massachusetts. The study sample seemed to have a generally accurate perception of CRC risk, which was appropriately increased in the presence of known risk factors. In multivariable analyses that controlled for all measured covariates, financial situation modified the association between perceived risk and a personal history of polyps, while age and insurance status modified the association between perceived risk and family history of CRC. CRC worry, self-reported health, personal history of other cancer and compliance with screening guidelines remained significant predictors of perceived risk. Potential interactions between objective risk factors and socioeconomic characteristics should be further explored in longitudinal studies.

CDC-funded intervention research aimed at promoting colorectal cancer screening in communities.

BACKGROUND: Although strong scientific evidence has shown that screening for colorectal cancer saves lives, most U.S. adults who are at the recommended age are not being screened. Prior studies suggest that barriers to routine screening vary by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, urban/rural residence, health insurance status, and factors related to health care providers and the health care environment. Relatively few studies, however, have identified and tested intervention approaches to promote routine colorectal cancer screening among diverse populations. METHODS: The Division of Cancer Prevention and Control at CDC has funded ongoing projects to develop and test interventions to promote routine colorectal cancer screening among medically underserved populations in Appalachia, the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, the High Plains region of Colorado, and other U.S. communities. RESULTS: This article provides an overview of colorectal cancer screening intervention studies currently funded by CDC that focus on a wide range of populations, including medically underserved persons who live in predominately rural areas, Hispanic and non-Hispanic persons, urban African Americans, persons with low health literacy, and persons enrolled in managed care organizations. CONCLUSIONS: These CDC-funded intervention research projects are likely to contribute importantly to evidence about what works to promote colorectal cancer screening in diverse U.S. communities. .