Implementation of an integrated framework for a breast cancer screening and navigation program for women from underresourced communities.
Breast Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Chicago
/ ethnology
Early Detection of Cancer
/ methods
Evidence-Based Practice
Female
Health Promotion
Humans
Mammography
Medically Underserved Area
Medically Uninsured
/ ethnology
Middle Aged
Patient Navigation
/ organization & administration
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Chicago
breast neoplasms
disparities
early detection of cancer
evidence-based practice
minority groups
patient navigation
Journal
Cancer
ISSN: 1097-0142
Titre abrégé: Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0374236
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 05 2020
15 05 2020
Historique:
received:
12
01
2020
accepted:
06
02
2020
entrez:
30
4
2020
pubmed:
30
4
2020
medline:
22
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Trends in breast cancer mortality in the United States are decreasing, but racial disparities persist. Using an implementation science framework to inform evidence-based breast cancer screening and navigation within federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) with community stakeholders can mitigate barriers to screening. Using an integrated theoretical framework of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model and the Social Ecological Model, the University of Illinois Cancer Center and Mile Square Health Centers (MSHC) FQHC developed a breast cancer screening and navigation program, known as the Mile Square Accessible Mammogram Outreach and Engagement (Mi-MAMO) program, to tackle breast cancer disparities in Chicago among underresourced communities. To increase access to screening, patient navigators conducted community outreach activities. Partnerships were forged with community-based organizations, health care systems, and insurers. Outcomes were monitored with standardized performance measures. Between January and December 2017, 103 women received a screening mammogram at MSHC. To increase screening rates, Mi-MAMO was started in August 2017. Between January and December 2018, the number of women who received a screening mammogram increased to 567. From August 2017 to December 2018, 779 women received navigation to screening and/or diagnostic services through the Mi-MAMO program. The majority of women were uninsured (63.9%), and 95.5% were racial/ethnic minorities. Twenty-four percent (n = 185) completed diagnostic services, and 10 women received positive breast cancer diagnoses (mean age, 49.7 years); all successfully navigated to treatment. The Mi-MAMO program is ongoing. Deploying an integrated framework for patient navigation programs can increase breast cancer screening utilization and awareness among underresourced populations at higher risk for breast cancer.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Trends in breast cancer mortality in the United States are decreasing, but racial disparities persist. Using an implementation science framework to inform evidence-based breast cancer screening and navigation within federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) with community stakeholders can mitigate barriers to screening.
METHODS
Using an integrated theoretical framework of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model and the Social Ecological Model, the University of Illinois Cancer Center and Mile Square Health Centers (MSHC) FQHC developed a breast cancer screening and navigation program, known as the Mile Square Accessible Mammogram Outreach and Engagement (Mi-MAMO) program, to tackle breast cancer disparities in Chicago among underresourced communities. To increase access to screening, patient navigators conducted community outreach activities. Partnerships were forged with community-based organizations, health care systems, and insurers. Outcomes were monitored with standardized performance measures.
RESULTS
Between January and December 2017, 103 women received a screening mammogram at MSHC. To increase screening rates, Mi-MAMO was started in August 2017. Between January and December 2018, the number of women who received a screening mammogram increased to 567. From August 2017 to December 2018, 779 women received navigation to screening and/or diagnostic services through the Mi-MAMO program. The majority of women were uninsured (63.9%), and 95.5% were racial/ethnic minorities. Twenty-four percent (n = 185) completed diagnostic services, and 10 women received positive breast cancer diagnoses (mean age, 49.7 years); all successfully navigated to treatment. The Mi-MAMO program is ongoing.
CONCLUSIONS
Deploying an integrated framework for patient navigation programs can increase breast cancer screening utilization and awareness among underresourced populations at higher risk for breast cancer.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2481-2493Subventions
Organisme : Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Organisme : UE LifeSciences
Organisme : Pfizer
Organisme : Novartis
Organisme : GE Healthcare
Organisme : Cepheid
Organisme : University of Washington
Organisme : Union for International Cancer Control
Organisme : Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
Organisme : pH Trust
Organisme : National Breast Cancer Foundation
Organisme : Journal of Global Oncology
Organisme : American Society of Clinical Pathology
Organisme : Chicago Department of Public Health
ID : 57469-450513
Organisme : American Society of Clinical Oncology
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : 1R13CA224776-01A1
Pays : United States
Organisme : National Comprehensive Cancer Network
Organisme : Susan G. Komen
ID : GSP18BHGI001
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2020 American Cancer Society.
Références
American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2017-2018. American Cancer Society; 2018.
Miller JW, Smith JL, Ryerson AB, Tucker TC, Allemani C. Disparities in breast cancer survival in the United States (2001-2009): findings from the CONCORD-2 study. Cancer. 2017;123(suppl 24):5100-5118.
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2019. American Cancer Society; 2019.
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures for African Americans 2016-2018. American Cancer Society; 2016.
Metropolitan Chicago Breast Cancer Task Force. How Far Have We Come? Improving Access to and Quality of Breast Health Services in Chicago. Metropolitan Chicago Breast Cancer Task Force; 2014.
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures for Hispanics/Latinos 2015-2017. American Cancer Society; 2015.
DeSantis CE, Siegel RL, Sauer AG, et al. Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2016: progress and opportunities in reducing racial disparities. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:290-308.
Abdus S, Selden TM. Preventive services for adults: how have differences across subgroups changed over the past decade? Med Care. 2013;51:999-1007.
Hunt BR, Whitman S, Hurlbert MS. Increasing black:white disparities in breast cancer mortality in the 50 largest cities in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol. 2014;38:118-123.
Susan G. Komen. Community Profile Report 2015: Chicagoland Area. Accessed April 24, 2018. http://komenchicago.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Komen-Chicagoland-Area-2015-Community-Profile-Report.pdf
Warnecke RB, Campbell RT, Vijayasiri G, Barrett RE, Rauscher GH. Multilevel examination of health disparity: the role of policy implementation in neighborhood context, in patient resources, and in healthcare facilities on later stage of breast cancer diagnosis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2019;28:59-66.
Stapleton SM, Oseni TO, Bababekov YJ, Hung YC, Chang DC. Race/ethnicity and age distribution of breast cancer diagnosis in the United States. JAMA Surg. 2018;153:594-595.
Allen CL, Harris JR, Hannon PA, et al. Opportunities for improving cancer prevention at federally qualified health centers. J Cancer Educ. 2014;29:30-37.
Health Resources and Services Administration. What is a health center? Accessed May 23, 2019. https://bphc.hrsa.gov/about/what-is-a-health-center/index.html
Adams SA, Choi SK, Khang L, et al. Decreased cancer mortality-to-incidence ratios with increased accessibility of federally qualified health centers. J Community Health. 2015;40:633-641.
Paskett ED, Harrop JP, Wells KJ. Patient navigation: an update on the state of the science. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:237-249.
Freeman HP. Patient navigation: a community based strategy to reduce cancer disparities. J Urban Health. 2006;83:139-141.
Freeman HP. Patient navigation as a targeted intervention: for patients at high risk for delays in cancer care. Cancer. 2015;121:3930-3932.
Robinson-White S, Conroy B, Slavish KH, Rosenzweig M. Patient navigation in breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Nurs. 2010;33:127-140.
Wells KJ, Battaglia TA, Dudley DJ, et al. Patient navigation: state of the art or is it science? Cancer. 2008;113:1999-2010.
Friedman DB, Young VM, Freedman DA, et al. Reducing cancer disparities through innovative partnerships: a collaboration of the South Carolina Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network and federally qualified health centers. J Cancer Educ. 2012;27:59-61.
Meade CD, Wells KJ, Arevalo M, et al. Lay navigator model for impacting cancer health disparities. J Cancer Educ. 2014;29:449-457.
Rositch AF, Unger-Saldana K, DeBoer RJ, Ng’ang’a A, Weiner BJ. The role of dissemination and implementation science in global breast cancer control programs: frameworks, methods, and examples. Cancer. 2020;126(Suppl):2394-2404.
Eccles MP, Mittman BS. Welcome to Implementation Science. Implement Sci. 2006;1:1.
Peters DH, Tran NT, Adam T. Implementation Research in Health: A Practical Guide. World Health Organization; 2013.
Feldstein AC, Glasgow RE. A Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34:228-243.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Accessed January 2, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/nbccedp/sem.htm
Muhrer JC. Improving breast cancer screening in a federally qualified health center with a team of nursing leaders. Nurse Pract. 2017;42:12-16.
Bauer MS, Damschroder L, Hagedorn H, Smith J, Kilbourne AM. An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychol. 2015;3:32.
Battaglia TA, Roloff K, Posner MA, Freund KM. Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: a patient navigation intervention. Cancer. 2007;109:359-367.
Liles EG, Schneider JL, Feldstein AC, et al. Implementation challenges and successes of a population-based colorectal cancer screening program: a qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives. Implement Sci. 2015;10:41.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). Accessed April 16, 2018. http://medbox.iiab.me/modules/en-cdc/www.cdc.gov/cancer/crccp/sem.htm
Belza B, Toobert DJ, Glasgow RE. RE-AIM for Program Planning: Overview and Applications. National Council on Aging; 2007:165.
Chicago Health Atlas. Access health data for Chicago and your community. Accessed June 17, 2019. https://www.chicagohealthatlas.org/
American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. Accessed April 24, 2019. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/find-cancer-early/cancer-screening-guidelines/american-cancer-society-guidelines-for-the-early-detection-of-cancer.html
Natale-Pereira A, Enard KR, Nevarez L, Jones LA. The role of patient navigators in eliminating health disparities. Cancer. 2011;117:3543-3552.
Freeman HP, Rodriguez RL. History and principles of patient navigation. Cancer. 2011;117(15 suppl):3539-3542.
Community Preventive Services Task Force. What Works: Cancer Screening. Evidence-Based Interventions for Your Community. Accessed August 30, 2019. https://www.thecommunityguide.org/sites/default/files/assets/What-Works-Factsheet-CancerScreening.pdf
Harold P. Freeman Patient Navigation Institute. Patient Navigation Program. Accessed January 3, 2019. http://www.hpfreemanpni.org/
Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. About the BCSC. Accessed January 12, 2019. https://www.bcsc-research.org/about
Lehman CD, Arao RF, Sprague BL, et al. National performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography: update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Radiology. 2016;283:49-58.
National Cancer Institute. Cancer Trends Progress Report. https://progressreport.cancer.gov/detection/breast_cancer
Gabram SG, Lund MJB, Gardner J, et al. Effects of an outreach and internal navigation program on breast cancer diagnosis in an urban cancer center with a large African-American population. Cancer. 2008;113:602-607.
Fouad MN, Acemgil A, Bae S, et al. Patient navigation as a model to increase participation of African Americans in cancer clinical trials. J Oncol Pract. 2016;12:556-563.
Scheitler A, Shimkhada R, Ko M, Glenn B, Ponce N. Patient navigators and breast cancer care: policy solutions to help survivors access California's complex system of care. Accessed January 4, 2019. http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/publications/Documents/PDF/2018/breastcancercare-navigators-mar2018.pdf
Murillo R, Diaz S, Perry F, et al. Increased breast cancer screening and downstaging in Colombian women: a randomized trial of opportunistic breast-screening. Int J Cancer. 2016;138:705-713.
Vale DB, Filho CC, Shinzato JY, Spreafico FS, Basu P, Zeferino LC. Downstaging in opportunistic breast cancer screening in Brazil: a temporal trend analysis. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:432.
Bernardo BM, Zhang X, Beverly Hery CM, Meadows RJ, Paskett ED. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs across the cancer continuum: a systematic review. Cancer. 2019;125:2747-2761.
Taylor MJ, McNicholas C, Nicolay C, Darzi A, Bell D, Reed JE. Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23:290-298.
National Implementation Research Network. Active implementation hub module 5: improvement cycles. Accessed May 1, 2019. https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/module-5