Suppr超能文献

安全网环境下宫颈癌筛查的自我采样:PRESTIS随机临床试验

Self-Collection for Cervical Cancer Screening in a Safety-Net Setting: The PRESTIS Randomized Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Montealegre Jane R, Hilsenbeck Susan G, Bulsara Shaun, Parker Susan L, Amboree Trisha L, Anderson Matthew L, Daheri Maria, Jibaja-Weiss Maria L, Schmeler Kathleen M, Deshmukh Ashish A, Chiao Elizabeth Y, Scheurer Michael E

机构信息

Department of Behavioral Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2025 Jun 6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.2971.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

There are limited data on the effectiveness of mailed self-collection to increase cervical cancer screening (CCS) participation in underresourced health care settings.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of mailed self-collection kits, with and without patient navigation, to telephone reminders to increase CCS in a safety-net health system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This pragmatic, parallel, single-blinded, randomized clinical trial within a publicly funded safety-net health system in Houston, Texas, compared (1) telephone reminder (TR) for clinic-based screening, (2) TR with mailed self-collection (SC), and (3) TR with mailed SC and patient navigation among a random sample of CCS-eligible patients not up to date with CCS, including those with no CCS on record. The trial was conducted from February 20, 2020, to August 31, 2023.

INTERVENTIONS

All groups received a TR by a patient navigator to attend clinic-based CCS. In the SC and SC with patient navigation groups, participants were additionally mailed a self-collection kit to their home as an alternative to clinic-based CCS. In the SC with patient navigation group, the mailed kit was followed by a patient navigation telephone call.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

CCS participation was defined as attendance for clinic-based screening or return of a mailed self-collection kit within 6 months of randomization and determined through electronic health record review.

RESULTS

Of the 2474 participants in the intent-to-screen analyses (median [IQR] age, 49 [39-57] years), 2325 (94.0%) were from racial or ethnic minoritized populations (1655 [66.9%] identifying as Hispanic or Latino, 82 [3.3%] as non-Hispanic Asian, 535 [21.6%] as non-Hispanic Black or African American, and 53 [2.1%] as other or unknown race, including American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander), and 1388 (56.1%) were covered by the county's publicly funded financial assistance program. At 6 months, 144 of 828 participants (17.4%) in the TR group, 340 of 828 (41.1%) in the SC group, and 381 of 818 (46.6%) in the SC with patient navigation group had participated in CCS. Compared to TR, relative participation was 2.36 (95% CI, 1.99-2.80) times higher for SC and 2.68 (95% CI, 2.27-3.16) times higher for SC with patient navigation; screening difference was 23.7% (95% CI, 19.4%-27.9%) for SC and 29.2% (95% CI, 24.9%-33.5%) for SC with patient navigation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial in a safety-net health system, SC was effective for increasing CCS participation among underscreened patients; there were modest additional gains from SC with patient navigation. The large increase in CCS participation using SC compared to TR suggest that SC should be considered in safety-net settings with suboptimal CCS coverage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03898167.

摘要

重要性

关于在资源匮乏的医疗环境中,邮寄自我采集方式对提高宫颈癌筛查(CCS)参与率有效性的数据有限。

目的

在一个安全网医疗系统中,比较有和没有患者导航的邮寄自我采集试剂盒与电话提醒在增加CCS方面的有效性。

设计、地点和参与者:这项在德克萨斯州休斯顿一个公共资助的安全网医疗系统内进行的实用、平行、单盲随机临床试验,比较了(1)基于诊所筛查的电话提醒(TR),(2)TR加邮寄自我采集(SC),以及(3)TR加邮寄SC和患者导航,对象是CCS资格未达标的随机抽取的CCS合格患者样本,包括那些无CCS记录的患者。试验于2020年2月20日至2023年8月31日进行。

干预措施

所有组均由患者导航员进行电话提醒,以参加基于诊所的CCS。在SC组和有患者导航的SC组中,还向参与者家中邮寄了自我采集试剂盒,作为基于诊所的CCS的替代方式。在有患者导航的SC组中,邮寄试剂盒后会有一次患者导航电话。

主要结局和测量指标

CCS参与定义为在随机分组后6个月内参加基于诊所的筛查或返还邮寄的自我采集试剂盒,并通过电子健康记录审查确定。

结果

在意向性筛查分析的2474名参与者中(年龄中位数[四分位间距]为49[39 - 57]岁),2325名(94.0%)来自少数族裔群体(1655名[66.9%]为西班牙裔或拉丁裔,82名[3.3%]为非西班牙裔亚裔,535名[21.6%]为非西班牙裔黑人或非裔美国人,53名[2.1%]为其他或未知种族,包括美洲印第安人或阿拉斯加原住民以及夏威夷原住民或其他太平洋岛民),1388名(56.1%)由该县公共资助的财政援助计划覆盖。6个月时,TR组828名参与者中有144名(17.4%)、SC组828名中有340名(41.1%)、有患者导航的SC组818名中有381名(46.6%)参与了CCS。与TR相比,SC的相对参与率高2.36倍(95%置信区间,1.99 - 2.80),有患者导航的SC高2.68倍(95%置信区间,2.27 - 3.16);SC的筛查差异为23.7%(95%置信区间,19.4% - 27.9%),有患者导航的SC为29.2%(95%置信区间,24.9% - 33.5%)。

结论和相关性

在这个安全网医疗系统的随机临床试验中,SC对于提高筛查不足患者的CCS参与率是有效的;有患者导航的SC有适度的额外收益。与TR相比,使用SC使CCS参与率大幅提高,这表明在CCS覆盖率不理想的安全网环境中应考虑采用SC。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT03898

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/770b/12144659/c871169ba016/jamainternmed-e252971-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验