Health plan-based mailed fecal testing for colorectal cancer screening among dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare enrollees: Outcomes of 2 program models.

BACKGROUND: Health insurance plans are increasingly offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but few studies have compared the outcomes of different program models (eg, invitation strategies). METHODS: This study compares the outcomes of 2 health plan-based mailed FIT program models. In the first program (2016), FIT kits were mailed to all eligible enrollees; in the second program (2018), FIT kits were mailed only to enrollees who opted in after an outreach phone call. Participants in this observational study included dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare enrollees who were aged 50 to 75 years and were due for CRC screening (1799 in 2016 and 1906 in 2018). Six-month FIT completion rates, implementation outcomes (eg, mailed FITs sent and reminders attempted), and program-related health plan costs for each program are described. RESULTS: All 1799 individuals in 2016 were sent an introductory letter and a FIT kit. In 2018, all 1906 were sent an introductory letter, and 1905 received at least 1 opt-in call attempt, with 410 (21.5%) sent a FIT. The FIT completion rate was 16.2% (292 of 1799 [95% CI, 14.5%-17.9%]) in 2016 and 14.6% (278 of 1906 [95% CI, 13.0%-16.2%]) in 2018 (P = .36). The overall implementation costs were higher in 2016 ($40,156) than 2018 ($34,899), with the cost per completed FIT slightly higher in 2016 ($138) than 2018 ($126). CONCLUSIONS: An opt-in mailed FIT program achieved FIT completion rates similar to those of a program mailing to all dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare enrollees. LAY SUMMARY: Health insurance plans can use different program models to successfully mail fecal test kits for colorectal cancer screening to dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare enrollees, with nearly 1 in 6 enrollees completing fecal testing.

Effectiveness and Cost of Organized Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains underused, especially in safety-net systems. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of organized outreach using fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) compared with usual care. METHODS: Patients age 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening from eight participating primary care safety-net clinics were randomly assigned to outreach intervention with usual care vs usual care alone. The intervention included a mailed postcard and call, followed by a mailed FIT kit, and a reminder phone call if the FIT kit was not returned. The primary outcome was screening participation at 1 year and a microcosting analysis of the outreach activities with embedded long-term cost-effectiveness of outreach. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 5386 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 5434 to usual care. FIT screening was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (57.9% vs 37.4%, P < .001; difference = 20.5%, 95% confidence interval = 18.6% to 22.4%). In the intervention group, FIT completion rate was higher in patients who had previously completed a FIT vs those who had not (71.9% vs 35.7%, P < .001). There was evidence of effect modification of the intervention by language, and clinic. Outreach cost approximately $23 per patient and $112 per additional patient screened. Projecting long-term outcomes, outreach was estimated to cost $9200 per quality-adjusted life-year gained vs usual care. CONCLUSION: Population-based management with organized FIT outreach statistically significantly increased CRC screening and was cost-effective in a safety-net system. The sustainability of the program and any impact of economies of scale remain to be determined.

Direct-to-member mailed colorectal cancer screening outreach for Medicaid and Medicare enrollees: Implementation and effectiveness outcomes from the BeneFIT study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening uptake is low, particularly among individuals enrolled in Medicaid. To the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding the effectiveness of direct-to-member outreach by Medicaid health insurance plans to raise colorectal cancer screening use, nor how best to deliver such outreach. METHODS: BeneFIT is a hybrid implementation-effectiveness study of 2 program models that health plans developed for a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) intervention. The programs differed with regard to whether they used a centralized approach (Health Plan Washington) or collaborated with health centers (Health Plan Oregon). The primary implementation outcome of the current study was the percentage of eligible enrollees to whom the plans delivered each intervention component. The primary effectiveness outcome was the rate of FIT completion within 6 months of mailing of the introductory letter. RESULTS: The health plans identified 12,000 eligible enrollees (8551 in Health Plan Washington and 3449 in Health Plan Oregon). Health Plan Washington mailed an introductory letter and FIT kit to 8551 enrollees (100%) and delivered a reminder call to 839 (10.3% of the 8132 attempted). Health Plan Oregon mailed an introductory letter, and a letter and FIT kit plus a reminder postcard to 2812 enrollees (81.5%) and 2650 enrollees (76.8%), respectively. FIT completion rates were 18.2% (1557 of 8551 enrollees) in Health Plan Washington. In Health Plan Oregon, completion rates were 17.4% (488 of 2812 enrollees) among enrollees who were mailed an introductory letter and 18.3% (484 of 2650 enrollees) among enrollees who also were mailed a FIT kit plus reminder postcard. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of mailed FIT outreach by health plans may be effective and could reach many individuals at risk of developing colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer screening in the United States: Trends from 2008 to 2015 and variation by health insurance coverage.

Regular colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended for reducing CRC incidence and mortality. This paper provides an updated analysis of CRC screening in the United States (US) and examines CRC screening by several features of health insurance coverage. Recommendation-consistent CRC screening was calculated for adults aged 50-75 in 2008, 2010, 2013 and 2015 using data from the National Health Interview Survey. CRC screening prevalence in 2015 was described overall and by sociodemographic subgroups. CRC screening by health insurance coverage was further examined using multivariable logistic regression, stratified by age (50-64 years and 65-75 years) and adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, time in US, and comorbid conditions. Recommendation-consistent screening increased from 51.6% in 2008 to 58.3% in 2010 (p < 0.001). Use plateaued from 2010 to 2013 but increased to 61.3% in 2015 (p < 0.001). In 2015, adults aged 50-64 years with traditional employer-sponsored private insurance were more likely to be screened (62.2%) than those with traditional private direct purchase plans (50.9%) and the uninsured (24.8%) (p < 0.01, respectively). After multivariable adjustment, differences between traditional employer-sponsored private insurance and the uninsured remained statistically significant. Adults aged 65-75 with Medicare and private insurance were more likely to be screened (76.3%) than those with Medicare, no supplemental insurance (68.8%) or Medicare and Medicaid (65.2%) (p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the differences between Medicare and private insurance and Medicare no supplemental insurance remained statistically significant. CRC screening rates have increased over time, but certain segments of the population, especially the uninsured, continue to screen below recommended levels.

Recruitment for the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

BACKGROUND: To reduce disparities in breast and cervical cancer in the U.S., it is essential that programs such as CDC's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) use evidence-based strategies. Recommendations for interventions to increase breast and cervical cancer screening have been disseminated by national public health organizations. To increase screening, cancer control planners would benefit from use of evidence-based strategies for recruitment of participants in their communities. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to inventory recruitment activities for cancer screening within NBCCEDP programs and assess if activities used to increase cancer screening are evidence-based. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 61 recruitment coordinators in 2008 to elicit their recruitment activities, use of evidence-based resources, and barriers to using evidence-based interventions (EBIs). Study data were analyzed in 2009. RESULTS: Of the 340 activities reported, many were categorized as educational materials, one-on-one education, mass media, group education, and special events. Two thirds of inventoried activities matched an EBI. Coordinators reported that colleagues and the CDC are their primary sources of information about EBIs and few coordinators had used evidence-based resources. Lack of money or funding, questionable applicability to priority populations, limited staffing or staff time, and insufficient evidence-based research were the most important barriers to EBI use. CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of NBCCEDP recruitment activities were evidence-based, one third were not. Additional training and technical assistance are recommended to help public health agencies adopt the use of these strategies.

Trends in colorectal cancer screening disparities in people aged 50-64 years, 2000-2005.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low, and racial, ethnic, and economic disparities have been reported. Whether disparities in CRC screening have decreased over time is unknown. This study aimed to determine whether progress was made between 2000 and 2005 in reducing CRC screening disparities by race, ethnicity, income, and insurance status. METHODS: Age-adjusted percentages of participants aged 50-64 who reported CRC screening (home fecal occult blood test in the past year or endoscopy in the past 10 years) were estimated from the 2000 (n=6,020 participants) and 2005 (n=6,706) cancer control supplements of the National Health Interview Survey, with analysis in 2007. RESULTS: Screening rates did not increase between 2000 and 2005 for Hispanic women or uninsured women. Only for high-income participants did screening exceed 50%. For both men and women, the uninsured had the lowest levels of screening (19.1% and 19.3%, respectively, in 2005), and the greatest disparities were observed among groups defined by health insurance status. For women, disparities by ethnicity, income, and insurance status increased over time, whereas among men, disparities in 2005 were similar to those in 2000. For Hispanic women, growing disparities were present at all income and insurance levels and persisted after additional adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: No progress was made in reducing most CRC screening disparities between 2000 and 2005. Methods are needed to increase CRC screening among everyone, but in particular Hispanic women and uninsured men and women.

Screening by prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination in relation to prostate cancer mortality: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The potential role of prostate cancer screening in reducing mortality is uncertain. To examine whether screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test or digital rectal examination is associated with reduced prostate cancer mortality, we conducted a population-based case-control study in 4 health maintenance organizations. METHODS: Cases were 769 health plan members who died because of prostate adenocarcinoma during the years 1997-2001. We randomly selected 929 controls from the health plan membership and matched them to cases on health plan, age, race, and membership history. Medical records were used to document all screening tests in the 10 years before and including the date on which prostate cancer was first suspected. RESULTS: Among white participants, 62% of cases and 69% of controls had a least 1 screening PSA test or digital rectal examination (odds ratio = 0.73; 95% confidence interval = 0.55-0.97). The corresponding proportions for blacks were 59% and 61% (1.0; 0.59-1.4). Most screening tests were digital rectal examinations; therefore, in the subgroup with no history of PSA screening, the association between digital rectal screening and prostate cancer mortality was similar to the overall association (0.65 [0.48-0.88] among whites; 0.86 [0.53-1.4] among blacks). Very few men received screening PSA without screening digital rectal examination (6% of cases and 7% of controls among whites). CONCLUSIONS: Digital rectal screening was associated with a reduced risk of death due to prostate cancer in our population. Because of several data limitations, this study could not accurately estimate the effect of PSA screening separate from digital rectal examination.