Suppr超能文献

当费用成为障碍时远程医疗干预对结肠镜检查接受率的影响:家庭CARE整群随机对照试验

Efficacy of a Telehealth Intervention on Colonoscopy Uptake When Cost Is a Barrier: The Family CARE Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Steffen Laurie E, Boucher Kenneth M, Damron Barbara H, Pappas Lisa M, Walters Scott T, Flores Kristina G, Boonyasiriwat Watcharaporn, Vernon Sally W, Stroup Antoinette M, Schwartz Marc D, Edwards Sandra L, Kohlmann Wendy K, Lowery Jan T, Wiggins Charles L, Hill Deirdre A, Higginbotham John C, Burt Randall, Simmons Rebecca G, Kinney Anita Y

机构信息

University of New Mexico Cancer Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Department of Oncologic Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.

出版信息

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Sep;24(9):1311-8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0150. Epub 2015 Jun 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We tested the efficacy of a remote tailored intervention Tele-Cancer Risk Assessment and Evaluation (TeleCARE) compared with a mailed educational brochure for improving colonoscopy uptake among at-risk relatives of colorectal cancer patients and examined subgroup differences based on participant reported cost barriers.

METHODS

Family members of colorectal cancer patients who were not up-to-date with colonoscopy were randomly assigned as family units to TeleCARE (N = 232) or an educational brochure (N = 249). At the 9-month follow-up, a cost resource letter listing resources for free or reduced-cost colonoscopy was mailed to participants who had reported cost barriers and remained nonadherent. Rates of medically verified colonoscopy at the 15-month follow-up were compared on the basis of group assignment and within group stratification by cost barriers.

RESULTS

In intent-to-treat analysis, 42.7% of participants in TeleCARE and 24.1% of participants in the educational brochure group had a medically verified colonoscopy [OR, 2.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-3.52]. Cost was identified as a barrier in both groups (TeleCARE = 62.5%; educational brochure = 57.0%). When cost was not a barrier, the TeleCARE group was almost four times as likely as the comparison to have a colonoscopy (OR, 3.66; 95% CI, 1.85-7.24). The intervention was efficacious among those who reported cost barriers; the TeleCARE group was nearly twice as likely to have a colonoscopy (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.12-3.52).

CONCLUSIONS

TeleCARE increased colonoscopy regardless of cost barriers.

IMPACT

Remote interventions may bolster screening colonoscopy regardless of cost barriers and be more efficacious when cost barriers are absent.

摘要

背景

我们测试了一种远程定制干预措施——远程癌症风险评估与评估(TeleCARE)与邮寄教育手册相比,在提高结直肠癌患者高危亲属结肠镜检查接受率方面的效果,并根据参与者报告的成本障碍检查了亚组差异。

方法

结肠镜检查未达最新标准的结直肠癌患者家属作为家庭单位被随机分配到TeleCARE组(N = 232)或教育手册组(N = 249)。在9个月的随访中,向报告有成本障碍且仍未坚持的参与者邮寄了一封列出免费或低成本结肠镜检查资源的成本资源信。在15个月的随访中,根据分组情况以及按成本障碍进行的组内分层,比较了经医学验证的结肠镜检查率。

结果

在意向性分析中,TeleCARE组42.7%的参与者和教育手册组24.1%的参与者进行了经医学验证的结肠镜检查[比值比(OR),2.37;95%置信区间(CI)1.59 - 3.52]。两组均将成本确定为一个障碍(TeleCARE组 = 62.5%;教育手册组 = 57.0%)。当成本不是障碍时,TeleCARE组进行结肠镜检查的可能性几乎是对照组的四倍(OR,3.66;95% CI,1.85 - 7.24)。该干预措施在报告有成本障碍的人群中有效;TeleCARE组进行结肠镜检查的可能性几乎是对照组的两倍(OR,1.99;95% CI,1.12 - 3.52)。

结论

无论成本障碍如何,TeleCARE均提高了结肠镜检查率。

影响

远程干预措施可能会提高筛查结肠镜检查率,无论成本障碍如何,并且在没有成本障碍时更有效。

相似文献

1
Efficacy of a Telehealth Intervention on Colonoscopy Uptake When Cost Is a Barrier: The Family CARE Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Sep;24(9):1311-8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0150. Epub 2015 Jun 22.
3
Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening.
Med Care. 2010 Jun;48(6):553-7. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181dbd8eb.
6
Economic Evaluation of Tailored Web versus Tailored Telephone-Based Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening among Women.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2020 Mar;13(3):309-316. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-19-0376. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
8
Effect of a mailed brochure on appointment-keeping for screening colonoscopy: a randomized trial.
Ann Intern Med. 2006 Dec 19;145(12):895-900. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-12-200612190-00006.

引用本文的文献

3
Understanding cancer genetic risk assessment motivations in a remote tailored risk communication and navigation intervention randomized controlled trial.
Health Psychol Behav Med. 2022 Dec 9;10(1):1190-1215. doi: 10.1080/21642850.2022.2150623. eCollection 2022.
4
The psychological challenges for oncological patients in times of COVID-19 pandemic: telemedicine, a solution?
Future Oncol. 2020 Oct;16(29):2265-2268. doi: 10.2217/fon-2020-0552. Epub 2020 Jul 13.
8
Epidemiology and Implementation of Cancer Prevention in Disparate Populations and Settings.
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2019 Jan;39:50-60. doi: 10.1200/EDBK_238965. Epub 2019 May 17.
10
Invitation to Screening Colonoscopy in the Population at Familial Risk for Colorectal Cancer.
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2018 Oct 26;115(43):715-722. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0715.

本文引用的文献

1
Can we achieve an 80% screening rate for colorectal cancer by 2018 in the United States?
Cancer. 2015 Jul 1;121(13):2127-8. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29335. Epub 2015 Mar 12.
2
Public health impact of achieving 80% colorectal cancer screening rates in the United States by 2018.
Cancer. 2015 Jul 1;121(13):2281-5. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29336. Epub 2015 Mar 12.
3
Hereditary and common familial colorectal cancer: evidence for colorectal screening.
Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Mar;60(3):734-47. doi: 10.1007/s10620-014-3465-z. Epub 2014 Dec 12.
4
Inequalities in premature death from colorectal cancer by state.
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Mar 10;33(8):829-35. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.7519. Epub 2014 Nov 10.
5
Familial colorectal cancer: a review.
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jul 28;20(28):9292-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i28.9292.
6
Effects of Massachusetts health reform on the use of clinical preventive services.
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Sep;29(9):1287-95. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2865-2. Epub 2014 May 1.
8
Challenges and possible solutions to colorectal cancer screening for the underserved.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Apr;106(4):dju032. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju032. Epub 2014 Mar 28.
9
A randomized trial to increase colonoscopy screening in members of high-risk families in the colorectal cancer family registry and cancer genetics network.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Apr;23(4):601-10. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-1085. Epub 2014 Feb 5.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验