Evaluating the sustainability of a cancer screening intervention through a PRISM: The PreView experience.

Although many trials of cancer screening interventions evaluate efficacy and effectiveness, less research focuses on how to sustain interventions in non-research settings, which limit the potential reach of these interventions. Identifying the factors that influence the potential for sustainability is critical. We evaluate the factors influencing sustainability of PreView, a Cancer Screening Intervention, within the context of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). PRISM includes organizational and patient perspectives of the intervention as well as characteristics of the organizational and patient recipients. It considers how the program or intervention design, external environment, implementation, and sustainability infrastructure and the recipients influence program adoption, implementation, and maintenance. We evaluate the attempts at sustainability of PreView within the constructs of PRISM. Encouraging patients to use PreView was more difficult outside of a clinical trial. Organizational perspectives on how the intervention fit in with other goals, patient perspectives on how the intervention is individualized (i.e. being able to choose which cancer screening to address) and focused on barriers, patient characteristics (i.e. having multiple comorbidities making cancer screening less of a priority), organizational characteristics (i.e. middle managers having competing responsibilities), external environment influences (i.e. reimbursement for achieving certain cancer screening goals), and sustainability infrastructure all affect the likelihood of PreView being sustained in clinical practice. Despite advance planning for sustainability, adapting interventions to achieve sustainability is difficult. Lessons learned from evaluating PreView within the PRISM model can inform future sustainability efforts.

PreView: a Randomized Trial of a Multi-site Intervention in Diverse Primary Care to Increase Rates of Age-Appropriate Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Women aged 50-70 should receive breast, cervical (until age 65), and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening; men aged 50-70 should receive CRC screening and should discuss prostate cancer screening (PSA). PreView, an interactive, individually tailored Video Doctor Plus Provider Alert Intervention, adresses all cancers for which average risk 50-70-year-old individuals are due for screening or screening discussion. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 6 clinical sites. Participants were randomized to PreView or a video about healthy lifestyle. Intervention group participants completed PreView before their appointment and their clinicians received a "Provider Alert." Primary outcomes were receipt of mammography, Pap tests (with or without HPV testing), CRC screening (FIT in last year or colonoscopy in last 10 years), and PSA screening discussion. Additional outcomes included breast, cervical, and CRC screening discussion. RESULTS: A total of 508 individuals participated, 257 in the control group and 251 in the intervention group. Screening rates were relatively high at baseline. Compared with baseline screening rates, there was no significant increase in mammography or Pap smear screening, and a nonsignificant increase (18% vs 12%) in CRC screening. Intervention participants reported a higher rate of PSA discussion than did control participants (58% vs 36%: P < 0.01). Similar increases were seen in discussions about mammography, cervical cancer, and CRC screening. CONCLUSION: In clinics with relatively high overall screening rates at baseline, PreView did not result in significant increases in breast, cervical, or CRC screening. PreView led to an increase in PSA screening discussion. Clinician-patient discussion of all cancer screenings significantly increased, suggesting that interventions like PreView may be most useful when discussion of the pros and cons of screening is recommended and/or with patients reluctant to undergo screening. Future research should investigate PreView's impact on those who are hesitant or reluctant to undergo screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02264782.

The role of religiosity in influencing adolescent and adult alcohol use in Trinidad.

This study examined the role of religiosity among adolescents' and adults' alcohol use in Trinidad. A stratified random sample design of 369 adolescents and 210 adult parents belonging to the various religious groups in Trinidad was employed. Participants were randomly selected from various educational districts across Trinidad. Adolescent respondents completed a demographic questionnaire and the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory-A2 (SASSI-A2). Adult participants completed a similar demographic questionnaire and questions taken from the SASSI-A2 that related to alcohol use. MANOVA analyses revealed significant main effects for adolescents' and adults' alcohol use as it relates to religious affiliation and frequency of religious service attendance. It is hoped that these findings will assist health educators in the formulation of intervention programs in Trinidad.

Influence of religious affiliation in alcohol use among adolescents in Trinidad, Tobago, and St. Lucia: a follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of religious affiliation and other demographic variables in alcohol use and attitudes among adolescents in Trinidad, Tobago and St. Lucia. METHOD: The study used a stratified random sample design of 380 male and 455 female students belonging to the 3 major ethnic groups in Trinidad, Tobago and St. Lucia (Afro-Trinidadian, Indo-Trinidadian, and Mixed group). RESULTS: MANOVA showed an effect for religion, with Hindu adolescents having higher levels of regular alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: This finding supports the existing research in Trinidad and developed countries on the effect of various religious denominations of alcohol use and attitudes.