精神疾病和/或物质使用障碍患者的结直肠癌筛查患者导航:试点随机对照试验。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Journal of Dual Diagnosis Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Epub Date: 2020-08-07 DOI:10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542
Carolina Abuelo, Jeffrey M Ashburner, Steven J Atlas, Amy Knudsen, James Morrill, Patricia Corona, Derri Shtasel, Sanja Percac-Lima
{"title":"精神疾病和/或物质使用障碍患者的结直肠癌筛查患者导航:试点随机对照试验。","authors":"Carolina Abuelo,&nbsp;Jeffrey M Ashburner,&nbsp;Steven J Atlas,&nbsp;Amy Knudsen,&nbsp;James Morrill,&nbsp;Patricia Corona,&nbsp;Derri Shtasel,&nbsp;Sanja Percac-Lima","doi":"10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the US. Screening has decreased CRC mortality. However, disadvantaged patients, particularly those with mental illness or substance use disorder (SUD), are less likely to be screened. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the impact of a patient navigation program on CRC screening in patients with mental illness and/or SUD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pilot randomized nonblinded controlled trial was conducted from January to June 2017 in an urban community health center serving a low-income population. We randomized 251 patients aged 50-74 years with mental illness and/or SUD diagnosis overdue for CRC screening to intervention (<i>n</i> = 126) or usual care (<i>n</i> = 125) stratified by mental illness, SUD, or dual diagnosis. Intervention group patients received a letter followed by a phone call from patient navigators. Navigators helped patients overcome their individual barriers to CRC screening including: education, scheduling, explanation of bowel preparation, lack of transportation or accompaniment to appointments. If patient refused colonoscopy, navigators offered fecal occult blood testing. The main measure was proportion of patients completing CRC screening in intervention and usual care groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Navigators contacted 85 patients (67%) in the intervention group and 26 declined to participate. In intention-to treat analysis, more patients in the intervention group received CRC screening than in the usual care group, 19% versus 10.4% (<i>p</i> = .04). Among 56 intervention patients who received navigation, 19 completed screening (33.9% versus 10.4% in the control group, <i>p</i> = .001). In the subgroup of patients with SUD, 20% in the intervention group were screened compared to none in the usual care group (<i>p</i> = .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A patient navigation program improved CRC screening rates in patients with mental illness and/or SUD. Larger studies in diverse care settings are needed to demonstrate generalizability and explore which modality of CRC screening is most acceptable and which navigator activities are most effective for this vulnerable population.</p><p><strong>Trials registration number: </strong>2016P001322.</p>","PeriodicalId":46571,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","volume":"16 4","pages":"438-446"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colorectal Cancer Screening Patient Navigation for Patients with Mental Illness and/or Substance Use Disorder: Pilot Randomized Control Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Abuelo,&nbsp;Jeffrey M Ashburner,&nbsp;Steven J Atlas,&nbsp;Amy Knudsen,&nbsp;James Morrill,&nbsp;Patricia Corona,&nbsp;Derri Shtasel,&nbsp;Sanja Percac-Lima\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the US. Screening has decreased CRC mortality. However, disadvantaged patients, particularly those with mental illness or substance use disorder (SUD), are less likely to be screened. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the impact of a patient navigation program on CRC screening in patients with mental illness and/or SUD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pilot randomized nonblinded controlled trial was conducted from January to June 2017 in an urban community health center serving a low-income population. We randomized 251 patients aged 50-74 years with mental illness and/or SUD diagnosis overdue for CRC screening to intervention (<i>n</i> = 126) or usual care (<i>n</i> = 125) stratified by mental illness, SUD, or dual diagnosis. Intervention group patients received a letter followed by a phone call from patient navigators. Navigators helped patients overcome their individual barriers to CRC screening including: education, scheduling, explanation of bowel preparation, lack of transportation or accompaniment to appointments. If patient refused colonoscopy, navigators offered fecal occult blood testing. The main measure was proportion of patients completing CRC screening in intervention and usual care groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Navigators contacted 85 patients (67%) in the intervention group and 26 declined to participate. In intention-to treat analysis, more patients in the intervention group received CRC screening than in the usual care group, 19% versus 10.4% (<i>p</i> = .04). Among 56 intervention patients who received navigation, 19 completed screening (33.9% versus 10.4% in the control group, <i>p</i> = .001). In the subgroup of patients with SUD, 20% in the intervention group were screened compared to none in the usual care group (<i>p</i> = .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A patient navigation program improved CRC screening rates in patients with mental illness and/or SUD. Larger studies in diverse care settings are needed to demonstrate generalizability and explore which modality of CRC screening is most acceptable and which navigator activities are most effective for this vulnerable population.</p><p><strong>Trials registration number: </strong>2016P001322.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dual Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"438-446\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dual Diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2020.1802542","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的:结直肠癌(CRC)是美国癌症死亡的第二大原因。筛查降低了结直肠癌的死亡率。然而,弱势患者,特别是那些患有精神疾病或物质使用障碍(SUD)的患者,不太可能接受筛查。本试验的目的是评估患者导航程序对精神疾病和/或SUD患者CRC筛查的影响。方法:于2017年1 - 6月在某城市社区卫生服务中心开展随机非盲对照试验。我们将251名年龄在50-74岁之间、精神疾病和/或SUD诊断逾期未进行CRC筛查的患者随机分为干预组(n = 126)或常规护理组(n = 125),按精神疾病、SUD或双重诊断分层。干预组的患者会收到患者导航员的一封信和电话。导航员帮助患者克服进行结直肠癌筛查的个人障碍,包括:教育、日程安排、解释肠道准备、缺乏交通工具或陪同预约。如果病人拒绝结肠镜检查,导航员会提供粪便隐血检查。主要指标为干预组和常规护理组完成结直肠癌筛查的患者比例。结果:在干预组中,Navigators联系了85名患者(67%),26名患者拒绝参与。在意向治疗分析中,干预组接受CRC筛查的患者多于常规护理组,分别为19%和10.4% (p = 0.04)。在56例接受导航的干预患者中,有19例完成了筛查(对照组为33.9%,对照组为10.4%,p = 0.001)。在SUD患者亚组中,干预组有20%进行了筛查,而常规护理组无筛查(p = 0.05)。结论:患者导航程序提高了精神疾病和/或SUD患者的CRC筛查率。需要在不同的护理环境中进行更大规模的研究,以证明普遍性,并探索哪种结直肠癌筛查方式是最可接受的,哪种导航员活动对这一弱势群体最有效。试验注册号:2016P001322。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Colorectal Cancer Screening Patient Navigation for Patients with Mental Illness and/or Substance Use Disorder: Pilot Randomized Control Trial.

Objective: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the US. Screening has decreased CRC mortality. However, disadvantaged patients, particularly those with mental illness or substance use disorder (SUD), are less likely to be screened. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the impact of a patient navigation program on CRC screening in patients with mental illness and/or SUD.

Methods: A pilot randomized nonblinded controlled trial was conducted from January to June 2017 in an urban community health center serving a low-income population. We randomized 251 patients aged 50-74 years with mental illness and/or SUD diagnosis overdue for CRC screening to intervention (n = 126) or usual care (n = 125) stratified by mental illness, SUD, or dual diagnosis. Intervention group patients received a letter followed by a phone call from patient navigators. Navigators helped patients overcome their individual barriers to CRC screening including: education, scheduling, explanation of bowel preparation, lack of transportation or accompaniment to appointments. If patient refused colonoscopy, navigators offered fecal occult blood testing. The main measure was proportion of patients completing CRC screening in intervention and usual care groups.

Results: Navigators contacted 85 patients (67%) in the intervention group and 26 declined to participate. In intention-to treat analysis, more patients in the intervention group received CRC screening than in the usual care group, 19% versus 10.4% (p = .04). Among 56 intervention patients who received navigation, 19 completed screening (33.9% versus 10.4% in the control group, p = .001). In the subgroup of patients with SUD, 20% in the intervention group were screened compared to none in the usual care group (p = .05).

Conclusions: A patient navigation program improved CRC screening rates in patients with mental illness and/or SUD. Larger studies in diverse care settings are needed to demonstrate generalizability and explore which modality of CRC screening is most acceptable and which navigator activities are most effective for this vulnerable population.

Trials registration number: 2016P001322.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
13.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Journal of Dual Diagnosis is a quarterly, international publication that focuses on the full spectrum of complexities regarding dual diagnosis. The co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders, or “dual diagnosis,” is one of the quintessential issues in behavioral health. Why do such high rates of co-occurrence exist? What does it tell us about risk profiles? How do these linked disorders affect people, their families, and the communities in which they live? What are the natural paths to recovery? What specific treatments are most helpful and how can new ones be developed? How can we enhance the implementation of evidence-based practices at clinical, administrative, and policy levels? How can we help clients to learn active recovery skills and adopt needed supports, clinicians to master new interventions, programs to implement effective services, and communities to foster healthy adjustment? The Journal addresses each of these perplexing challenges.
×
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