» Articles » PMID: 35346927

Clinic Factors Associated With Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Completion: The Difference-Making Role of Support Staff

Overview
Journal Ann Fam Med
Specialty Public Health
Date 2022 Mar 29
PMID 35346927
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) programs can facilitate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We sought to identify modifiable, clinic-level factors that distinguish primary care clinics with higher vs lower FIT completion rates in response to a centralized mailed FIT program.

Methods: We used baseline observational data from 15 clinics within a single urban federally qualified health center participating in a pragmatic trial to optimize a mailed FIT program. Clinic-level data included interviews with leadership using a guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and FIT completion rates. We used template analysis to identify explanatory factors and configurational comparative methods to identify specific combinations of clinic-level conditions that uniquely distinguished clinics with higher and lower FIT completion rates.

Results: We interviewed 39 clinic leaders and identified 58 potential explanatory factors representing clinic workflows and the CFIR inner setting domain. Clinic-level FIT completion rates ranged from 30% to 56%. The configurational model for clinics with higher rates (≥37%) featured any 1 of the following 3 factors related to support staff: (1) adding back- or front-office staff in past 12 months, (2) having staff help patients resolve barriers to CRC screening, and (3) having staff hand out FITs/educate patients. The model for clinics with lower rates involved the combined absence of these same 3 factors.

Conclusions: Three factors related to support staff differentiated clinics with higher and lower FIT completion rates. Adding nonphysician support staff and having those staff provide enabling services might help clinics optimize mailed FIT screening programs.

Citing Articles

The role of organizational capacity in intervention efficacy in a church-based cancer education program: A configurational analysis.

Knott C, Miech E, Woodard N, Huq M Glob Implement Res Appl. 2023; 3(3):284-294.

PMID: 38107832 PMC: 10723821. DOI: 10.1007/s43477-023-00089-0.


Mail-Based Self-Sampling to Complete Colorectal Cancer Screening: Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up Through Implementation Science.

Gupta S, Barnes A, Brenner A, Campbell J, Davis M, English K Prev Chronic Dis. 2023; 20:E112.

PMID: 38060411 PMC: 10723083. DOI: 10.5888/pcd20.230083.


Implementation of a novel program to support colorectal cancer screening in a community health center consortium before and after the onset of COVID-19: a qualitative study of stakeholders' perspectives.

Santiago-Rodriguez E, Hoeft K, Lugtu K, McGowen M, Ofman D, Adler J Implement Sci Commun. 2023; 4(1):54.

PMID: 37218022 PMC: 10201507. DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00439-x.


Data Challenges in Identifying Patients Due for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Clinics.

Petrik A, Coury J, Larson J, Badicke B, Coronado G, Davis M J Am Board Fam Med. 2023; 36(1):118-129.

PMID: 36759133 PMC: 10187985. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2022.220216R1.


Assessing the impact of multicomponent interventions on colorectal cancer screening through simulation: What would it take to reach national screening targets in North Carolina?.

Hicklin K, OLeary M, Nambiar S, Mayorga M, Wheeler S, Davis M Prev Med. 2022; 162:107126.

PMID: 35787844 PMC: 11056941. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107126.


References
1.
Chapman S, Marks A, Dower C . Positioning Medical Assistants for a Greater Role in the Era of Health Reform. Acad Med. 2015; 90(10):1347-52. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000775. View

2.
Castaneda S, Bharti B, Espinoza-Giacinto R, Sanchez V, OConnell S, Munoz F . Evaluating Two Evidence-Based Intervention Strategies to Promote CRC Screening Among Latino Adults in a Primary Care Setting. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2017; 5(3):530-535. PMC: 5738296. DOI: 10.1007/s40615-017-0395-4. View

3.
OLeary M, Hassmiller Lich K, Gu Y, Wheeler S, Coronado G, Bartelmann S . Colorectal cancer screening in newly insured Medicaid members: a review of concurrent federal and state policies. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19(1):298. PMC: 6509857. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4113-2. View

4.
Thompson J, Davis M, Leo M, Schneider J, Smith D, Petrik A . Participatory Research to Advance Colon Cancer Prevention (PROMPT): Study protocol for a pragmatic trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018; 67:11-15. PMC: 5903679. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.02.001. View

5.
Harris K, Kneale D, Lasserson T, McDonald V, Grigg J, Thomas J . School-based self-management interventions for asthma in children and adolescents: a mixed methods systematic review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 1:CD011651. PMC: 6353176. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011651.pub2. View