Exploring Colorectal Cancer Screening Reach Among United States Veterans: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-Based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Kanika Malani, Kirsten Loscalzo, Yousef Elfanagely, Kittichai Promrat
{"title":"Exploring Colorectal Cancer Screening Reach Among United States Veterans: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-Based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods.","authors":"Kanika Malani, Kirsten Loscalzo, Yousef Elfanagely, Kittichai Promrat","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (mFIT), in-clinic FIT (cFIT), and colonoscopy are believed to reach distinct patient populations. This study aims to evaluate this belief.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sociodemographic, clinical, and social determinants of health (SDOH) characteristics of 201 patients completing mFIT, 203 patients completing cFIT, and 74 patients completing colonoscopy at a Northeastern United States Veterans Affairs center from August 2023 to January 2024 were compared using descriptive statistics, χ2, and ANOVA tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients completing mFIT (P=0.003) and cFIT (P=0.001) were older than those completing colonoscopy. mFIT patients had more private health insurance as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. Patients completing colonoscopy had higher average disability ratings as compared with cFIT patients (P<0.0001). mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients had more time elapsed since their last primary care visit as compared with cFIT patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of mental health disorders as compared with colonoscopy (P<0.0001) and cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. cFIT patients had higher rates of past stool test use as compared with mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of past colonoscopy completion as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. There were no significant differences in SDOH domains among patients completing each of the screening methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While each of the screening methods reaches a different patient population, mFIT does not reach a substantially more vulnerable population compared with cFIT and colonoscopy, highlighting the need for improvements in mFIT outreach.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002065","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (mFIT), in-clinic FIT (cFIT), and colonoscopy are believed to reach distinct patient populations. This study aims to evaluate this belief.

Methods: Sociodemographic, clinical, and social determinants of health (SDOH) characteristics of 201 patients completing mFIT, 203 patients completing cFIT, and 74 patients completing colonoscopy at a Northeastern United States Veterans Affairs center from August 2023 to January 2024 were compared using descriptive statistics, χ2, and ANOVA tests.

Results: Patients completing mFIT (P=0.003) and cFIT (P=0.001) were older than those completing colonoscopy. mFIT patients had more private health insurance as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. Patients completing colonoscopy had higher average disability ratings as compared with cFIT patients (P<0.0001). mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients had more time elapsed since their last primary care visit as compared with cFIT patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of mental health disorders as compared with colonoscopy (P<0.0001) and cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. cFIT patients had higher rates of past stool test use as compared with mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of past colonoscopy completion as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. There were no significant differences in SDOH domains among patients completing each of the screening methods.

Conclusion: While each of the screening methods reaches a different patient population, mFIT does not reach a substantially more vulnerable population compared with cFIT and colonoscopy, highlighting the need for improvements in mFIT outreach.

探索美国退伍军人的结直肠癌筛查覆盖率:分析不同筛查方法中基于健康的患者因素的临床、社会人口和社会决定因素:分析不同筛查方法中基于健康的患者因素的临床、社会人口和社会决定因素。
简介:邮寄粪便免疫化学检验(mFIT)、诊所内粪便免疫化学检验(cFIT)和结肠镜检查被认为能覆盖不同的患者人群。本研究旨在评估这一观点:方法:使用描述性统计、χ2 和方差分析检验比较了 2023 年 8 月至 2024 年 1 月期间在美国东北部退伍军人事务中心完成 mFIT 的 201 名患者、完成 cFIT 的 203 名患者和完成结肠镜检查的 74 名患者的社会人口学、临床和健康社会决定因素(SDOH)特征:完成 mFIT(P=0.003)和 cFIT(P=0.001)的患者比完成结肠镜检查的患者年龄大:虽然每种筛查方法所覆盖的患者人群不同,但与 cFIT 和结肠镜检查相比,mFIT 所覆盖的弱势人群要少得多,因此需要改进 mFIT 的推广工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of clinical gastroenterology
Journal of clinical gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
339
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信