Longitudinal adherence to annual colorectal cancer screening among Black persons living in the United States enrolled in a community-based randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This study examined repeat colorectal cancer screening rates at 12 and 24 months as part of a randomized intervention trial among Black persons living in the United States and factors associated with screening adherence. METHODS: Participants completed a survey assessing demographics and Preventive Health Model (PHM) factors (e.g., self efficacy, susceptibility) and received either a culturally targeted photonovella plus free fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits (intervention group) or a standard educational brochure plus free FIT kits (comparison group). FIT return was assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months. Descriptive statistics summarized patterns of repeat screening. Logistic regression models assessed FIT uptake overtime, and demographic and PHM factors associated with screening adherence. RESULTS: Participants (N = 330) were U.S.-born (93%), non-Hispanic (97%), and male (52%). Initial FIT uptake within 6 months of enrollment was 86.6%, and subsequently dropped to 54.5% at 12 months and 36.6% at 24 months. Higher FIT return rates were observed for the brochure group at 24 months (51.5% vs 33.3% photonovella, p = .023). Multiple patterns of FIT kit return were observed: 37% completed FIT at all three time points (full adherence), 22% completed two of three (partial adherence), 29% completed one of three (partial adherence), and 12% did not return any FIT kits (complete nonadherence). Predictors of full adherence were higher levels of education and self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Full adherence to repeat screening was suboptimal. Most participants had partial adherence (one or two of three) to annual FIT screening. Future studies should focus on strategies to support repeat FIT screening.

Factors associated with prior completion of colorectal cancer and hepatitis C virus screenings among community health center patients: a cross-sectional study to inform a multi-behavioral educational intervention.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) and liver cancer are two of the leading causes of cancer death in the United States and persistent disparities in CRC and liver cancer incidence and outcomes exist. Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main contributors to liver cancer. Effective screening for both CRC and HCV exist and are recommended for individuals based upon age, regardless of gender or sex assigned at birth. Recommendations for both screening behaviors have been recently updated. However, screening rates for both CRC and HCV are suboptimal. Targeting adoption of multiple screening behaviors has the potential to reduce cancer mortality and disparities. OBJECTIVE: To examine psychosocial factors associated with completion of CRC and HCV screenings in order to inform a multi-behavioral educational intervention that pairs CRC and HCV screening information. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with participants (N = 50) recruited at two community health centers in Florida (United States). Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests were used to examine associations between completion of both CRC and HCV screening, CRC and HCV knowledge, Preventive Health Model constructs (e.g., salience and coherence, response efficacy, social influence), and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: Most participants were White (84%), female (56%), insured (80%), and reported a household income of $25,000 or less (53%). 30% reported ever previously completing both CRC and HCV screenings. Prior completion of both screening behaviors was associated with higher educational attainment (p = .014), having health insurance (p = .022), being U.S.-born (p = .043), and higher salience and coherence scores for CRC (p = .040) and HCV (p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate limited uptake of both CRC and HCV screenings among adults born between 1945 and 1965. Uptake was associated with multiple sociodemographic factors and health beliefs related to salience and coherence. Salience and coherence are modifiable factors associated with completion of both screening tests, suggesting the importance of incorporating these health beliefs in a multi-behavioral cancer education intervention. Additionally, health providers could simultaneously recommend and order CRC and HCV screening to improve uptake among this age cohort.

Vaccination uptake among post-treatment cancer survivors: A multi-vaccine scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Our goal was to provide an overview of uptake rates across vaccine types and factors associated with vaccine uptake among cancer survivor populations. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE® ALL (Wolters Kluwer), Embase (Elsevier) and CINAHL Complete (EBSCO) databases and according to PRISMA guidelines. Eligible articles were limited to those examining vaccination uptake among cancer survivors who had completed treatment, reported factors associated with uptake (e.g., barriers and facilitators), and published in English between 2011 and 2021. Two independent reviewers screened citations for inclusion and two performed data abstraction, verified by an arbiter. RESULTS: The search returned 4,215 total articles, and 271 duplicates were removed. During abstract/title screening, 212 articles were identified. Following full-text screening, 47 articles/abstracts were found to meet inclusion criteria, 16 articles/abstracts were removed, and 31 studies were included in the review. Among the 31 studies, participant age ranged from 9 years to adults of all ages. Vaccine types included: influenza (n = 18), human papillomavirus (n = 10), pneumococcal (n = 8), hepatitis A/B (n = 1), shingles (n = 1), measles (n = 1), tetanus/diphtheria (n = 1), and haemophilus influenza B (n = 1). Vaccine uptake varied greatly across studies, vaccine types, and participant populations. Factors affecting vaccination uptake included sociodemographic variables and social determinants of health, health beliefs/attitudes/knowledge, provider recommendation, and cancer treatment/clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the need for further examining factors associated with vaccine uptake, the need for clinical guidelines that specifically address vaccination among cancer survivors, and potential targets for multi-level interventions to improve vaccination rates among cancer survivor populations.

A Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-based process to develop theoretically-informed human papillomavirus vaccination educational materials for young adults.

OBJECTIVE: To develop theory-informed human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine education materials that appeal to 18-26-year-olds. METHODS: First, draft materials informed by Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Health Belief Model (HBM) were developed. Next, an initial set of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-guided interviews were conducted with 18-26-year-old participants to receive feedback about content, format, appeal, implementation facilitators and barriers, and potential delivery modalities. Then, interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Next, materials were modified based upon feedback. Finally, another set of interviews was conducted. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 15) were female (93%), White (60%), and non-Hispanic (93%). All (100%) had heard of HPV and the HPV vaccine, and 80% reported having received the vaccine. Participant feedback on materials included emphasizing vaccine benefits and efficacy, rewording to enhance comprehension, and adding images represent diversity beyond race/ethnicity and sexual orientation. Suggested delivery methods included social media, print materials, and posters. CONCLUSION: Qualitative interviews with young adults suggest that HPV education materials targeted to 18-26-year-olds should include health behavior theory-aligned messaging, inclusive imagery, and be disseminated through multiple modalities. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providers should consider utilizing theory-based education materials that are relevant and appealing to young adults.

Differences in Provider Hepatitis C Virus Screening Recommendations by Patient Risk Status.

Providers' recommendation is among the strongest predictors to patients engaging in preventive care. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare providers' Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) screening recommendation quality between high-risk and average-risk patients to determine if providers are universally recommending HCV screening, regardless of risk behaviors. This cross-sectional survey of 284 Indiana providers in 2020 assessed provider characteristics, HCV screening recommendation practices (strength, presentation, frequency, timeliness), self-efficacy, and barriers to recommending HCV screening. T-test and Chi-square compared recommendation practices for high-risk and average-risk patients. Prevalence ratios were calculated for variables associated with HCV recommendation strength comparing high-risk and average-risk patients. Logistic regression analyses examined factors associated with HCV recommendation strength for high- and average-risk patients, with odds ratios. Compared to average-risk patients, high-risk patients received higher proportion of HCV recommendations that were strong (70.4 % v. 42.4 %), routine (61.9 % v. 55.6 %), frequent (37.7 % v. 28 %), and timely (74.2 % v. 54.9 %) (P-values < 0.001). Compared to average-risk patients, providers with high-risk patients had a lower percentage of giving a strong recommendation if they were nurse practitioner (PR = 0.49). For high-risk patients, providers with higher self-efficacy (aOR = 2.16;95 %CI = 0.99-4.69) had higher odds, while those with higher perceived barriers (aOR = 0.19;95 %CI = 0.09-0.39) and those with an internal medicine specialty compared to family medicine (aOR = 0.22;95 %CI = 0.08-0.57) had lower odds of giving a strong recommendation. These data suggest providers are not universally recommending HCV screening for all adults regardless of reported risk. Future research should translate these findings into multilevel interventions to improve HCV screening recommendations regardless of patient risk status.

HPV Multilevel Intervention Strategies Targeting Immunization in Community Settings (HPV MISTICS): Study protocol for a hybrid 1 stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This protocol paper describes the overall design for HPV MISTICS, a multilevel intervention to increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation and completion rates among adolescents aged 11-17. METHODS: We will conduct a hybrid type 1 implementation-effectiveness trial using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in eight federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Intervention components target three levels: system, providers, and parents. Outcomes will be assessed using quantitative (e.g., vaccination data, survey data) and qualitative methods (e.g., staff and parent interviews). We expect to quantify changes in HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates for adolescents ages 11-17 in the eight FQHCs. We have hypothesized a 20-percentage point increase in HPV vaccine series initiation and a 10-percentage point increase in series completion. We also anticipate being able to explore factors at the system, provider, and patient levels as potential covariates. Implementation outcomes, barriers, and facilitators identified in the study will help characterize the implementation process and inform potential future intervention scale-up. RESULTS: The project is ongoing; effectiveness and implementation outcomes will be determined following project completion. CONCLUSIONS: Findings will provide evidence of an equity-informed research design and implementation procedures that could help improve HPV vaccination rates in similar health systems. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT05677360 (date registered: 2022-12-22); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05677360?lead=Moffitt%20Cancer%20Center%20&aggFilters=status:rec&page=2&rank=17.

Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial.

Background: Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite the Healthy People 2030 goal of 70.5%, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are suboptimal at about 40%. The Colorectal Cancer Awareness, Research, Education and Screening-Rural Expansion, Access, and Capacity for Health (CARES-REACH) study seeks to address this disparity and accelerate the adoption and utilization of effective, evidence-based CRC screening practices. This paper describes the CARES-REACH study design and implementation methods. Methods: Informed by a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework and enriched by implementation science approaches, CARES-REACH features a stepped wedge design with extension for maintenance to support an implementation strategy focused on multiple levels: organizational, provider, and patient levels that entail processes to boost initial and repeat screening among average risk and age-eligible adults. This multilevel study entails the implementation of a core set of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that include low literacy patient education (English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole language); provider education, system-wide electronic medical record (EMR) tools including provider prompts and patient reminders, FIT (fecal immunochemical test) kit distribution, plus an organization-wide cancer control champion who motivates providers, coaches and navigates patients, and monitors system-wide CRC screening activities. Trial registration: NCT04464668.