scholarly journals Influence of health insurance coverage on breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in rural primary care settings

Cancer ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 118 (24) ◽  
pp. 6217-6225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia A. Carney ◽  
Jean O'Malley ◽  
David I. Buckley ◽  
Motomi Mori ◽  
David A. Lieberman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Insurance ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Health Insurance Coverage ◽  
Rural Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Settings

scholarly journals Health Insurance Coverage Mandates: Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Post-ACA Era

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-130
Author(s):  
Michael A. Preston ◽  
Levi Ross ◽  
Askar Chukmaitov ◽  
Sharla A. Smith ◽  
Michelle L. Odlum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Health Insurance ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Health Insurance Coverage

scholarly journals Colorectal cancer screening in the United States: Trends from 2008 to 2015 and variation by health insurance coverage

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 199-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet S. de Moor ◽  
Robin A. Cohen ◽  
Jean A. Shapiro ◽  
Marion R. Nadel ◽  
Susan A. Sabatino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
United States ◽  
Health Insurance ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Health Insurance Coverage ◽  
The United States

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in rural primary care

2004 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.Allen Greiner ◽  
Kimberly K Engelman ◽  
Matthew A Hall ◽  
Edward F Ellerbeck
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Rural Primary Care

scholarly journals Promoting colorectal cancer screening through a new model of delivering rural primary care in the USA: a qualitative study

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jungyoon Kim ◽  
Lufei Young ◽  
Sarbinaz Bekmuratova ◽  
Daniel J Schober ◽  
Hongmei Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
New Model ◽  
Rural Primary Care ◽  
The Usa

Changes in the choice of colorectal cancer screening tests in primary care settings from 7,845 prospectively collected surveys

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 1541-1548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin C. S. Wong ◽  
George K. John ◽  
Hoyee W. Hirai ◽  
Thomas Y. T. Lam ◽  
Arthur K. C. Luk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Cancer Screening Tests

scholarly journals Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: Attitudes and Knowledge of Nurses and Physicians

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 98 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoshuaKanaabi Muliira ◽  
MelbaSheila D′Souza ◽  
SamiraMaroof Ahmed ◽  
SalimNasser Al-Dhahli ◽  
FahadRashid Matar Al-Jahwari
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Attitudes And Knowledge ◽  
Nurses And Physicians

scholarly journals Developing a Co-Production Strategy to Facilitate the Adoption and Implementation of Evidence-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Interventions for Rural Health Systems: A Pilot Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jungyoon Kim ◽  
Paul Estabrooks ◽  
Alisha Aggarwal ◽  
Analisa McMillan ◽  
Khalid Alshehri
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Systems Change ◽  
Content Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Rural Primary Care ◽  
Adoption And Implementation

Abstract Background: Evidence-based colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) interventions exist, but have not been broadly adopted in rural primary care settings. Participatory adoption and implementation strategies may be promising in closing this gap through a clinical-academic partnership to guide rural practitioners to locate, select, and implement CRCS interventions that align with local context. We developed a prototype strategy adapted from the National Cancer Institute’s ‘Putting Public Health Evidence in Action’ curriculum in collaboration with two rural clinics to facilitate systems change related to CRCS. This paper describes the process of co-development and delivery of a systems-focused strategy to improve adoption, implementation, and sustainability of CRCS interventions. Methods: We used a bundle of implementation strategies with a core focus on academic-clinical partnership development and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to identify clinical partner interests/preferences on delivery methods and content needed to facilitate intervention identification and systems-change processes that improve CRCS rates. Clinic physicians and staff (n=7) at the rural clinics were asked to evaluate the approach based on overall reactions and perceptions of innovation characteristics using 5-point Likert scale. After completing the systems-change process, we conducted key-stakeholder interviews (n=5) to assess feasibility and acceptability on content/delivery format and plans for ongoing implementation of CRCS evidence-based interventions (EBIs). Results: Electronic blueprints for CRCS EBI selection and implementation (8 modules) were developed and followed by an online forum/live-streaming conference to allow for CRCS tailoring. The two clinics used different learning approaches: one completed the modules together while the other completed the modules separately to cover material before a group video conference. Across all modules, participants in both clinics reported positive reactions toward the systems-change modules. Both clinics reported improvements in how they perceived the characteristics of the modules and the participatory approach to tailor selected CRCS EBIs. Through the process both clinics developed a specific EBI implementation plan. Interview participants reported that the approach was feasible and acceptable, and provided suggestions for further improvements on content, delivery, and format of the approach.Conclusions: The bundle of implementation strategies used were feasible and acceptable in rural primary care practices to facilitate the use of evidence-based approaches to improve CRCS.

scholarly journals Developing a Co-Production Strategy to Facilitate the Adoption and Implementation of Evidence-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Interventions for Rural Health Systems: A Pilot Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jungyoon Kim ◽  
Paul Estabrooks ◽  
Alisha Aggarwal ◽  
Analisa McMillan ◽  
Khalid Alshehri
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Systems Change ◽  
Content Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Rural Primary Care ◽  
Adoption And Implementation

Abstract Background: Evidence-based colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) interventions exist, but have not been broadly adopted in rural primary care settings. Participatory adoption and implementation strategies may be promising in closing this gap through a clinical-academic partnership to guide rural practitioners to locate, select, and implement CRCS interventions that align with local context. We developed a prototype strategy adapted from the National Cancer Institute’s ‘Putting Public Health Evidence in Action’ curriculum in collaboration with two rural clinics to facilitate systems change related to CRCS. This paper describes the process of co-development and delivery of a systems-focused strategy to improve adoption, implementation, and sustainability of CRCS interventions. Methods: We used a bundle of implementation strategies with a core focus on academic-clinical partnership development and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to identify clinical partner interests/preferences on delivery methods and content needed to facilitate intervention identification and systems-change processes that improve CRCS rates. Clinic physicians and staff (n=7) at the rural clinics were asked to evaluate the approach based on overall reactions and perceptions of innovation characteristics using 5-point Likert scale. After completing the systems-change process, we conducted key-stakeholder interviews (n=5) to assess feasibility and acceptability on content/delivery format and plans for ongoing implementation of CRCS evidence-based interventions (EBIs). Results: Electronic blueprints for CRCS EBI selection and implementation (8 modules) were developed and followed by an online forum/live-streaming conference to allow for CRCS tailoring. The two clinics used different learning approaches: one completed the modules together while the other completed the modules separately to cover material before a group video conference. Across all modules, participants in both clinics reported positive reactions toward the systems-change modules. Both clinics reported improvements in how they perceived the characteristics of the modules and the participatory approach to tailor selected CRCS EBIs. Through the process both clinics developed a specific EBI implementation plan. Interview participants reported that the approach was feasible and acceptable, and provided suggestions for further improvements on content, delivery, and format of the approach.Conclusions: The bundle of implementation strategies used were feasible and acceptable in rural primary care practices to facilitate the use of evidence-based approaches to improve CRCS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document