Implementation strategies in the Exploration and Preparation phases of a colorectal cancer screening intervention in community health centers
Curious3:03CCAI
paperi.ai
0:00 / 0:00
Renée M. Ferrari, Jennifer Leeman, Alison T. Brenner, Sara Y. Correa, Teri L. Malo, Alexis Moore, Meghan C. O’Leary, Connor M. Randolph, Shana Ratner, Leah Frerichs, Deeonna E. Farr, Seth D. Crockett, Stephanie B. Wheeler, Kristen Hassmiller Lich, Evan Beasley, Michelle Hogsed, Ashley Bland, Claudia Richardson, Mike Newcomer, Daniel S. Reuland
Colorectal cancer screening can save lives, yet the people most likely to be missed are often those with lower incomes or no insurance. This study asked how to make screening fit the places serving them.
Colorectal cancer screening can save lives, yet the people most likely to be missed are often those with lower incomes or no insurance. This study asked how to make screening fit the places serving them. Colorectal cancer screening reduces deaths, but screening remains underused in the United States.
Screening rates are especially low among people who are medically underserved and people without health insurance. Community health centers in North Carolina serve diverse populations, including many people with lower incomes or no health insurance. Screening has increased there, but it remains below state and national averages.
So the project began with three practical questions: what helps or hinders screening, which proven approaches fit these health centers, and how those approaches could become part of their everyday systems. That is like planning a neighborhood bus route: first learn where people are being left behind, then choose a route that fits, and finally work out how it will run.
The first stage involved engaging people connected to the health centers, choosing proven practices, and identifying needs, opportunities, and challenges in the health centers and their wider setting. The next stage focused on identifying and planning for barriers and supports related to the chosen practices.
The framework also considered factors inside and outside the health centers, plus the relationships connecting them. The early work identified barriers and supports at several levels, reached agreement on what a suitable approach should meet, and selected practices that fit those criteria.
Those discussions led to agreement on two approaches: mailing an at-home stool test and helping patients move through the steps needed after screening. But here was the catch: the plan needed many clinical steps and supports.
The group agreed to create a centralized outreach center to carry out the intervention’s core functions. The steps were grouped by their overall purpose, with the group settling on three core functions. The outreach center would identify and track people due for screening, mail the at-home test kits, and guide patients to follow-up colonoscopy.
The health centers would still be the patient’s point of care: they would provide information about eligible patients, reinforce why screening matters, help with follow-up, and record results. The work during these early stages produced a detailed plan for the later implementation phase.
Coalition building and workgroups helped partners reach agreement and take ownership of the intervention and how it would operate. The project also identified possible additions to a collection of recognized implementation strategies, including reviewing current evidence about effective interventions and using systems.
The central lesson is that better screening began with listening: community health centers helped choose the approach, while a shared outreach system handled the work. That can make screening easier to find and follow through on.
A derivative work by Paperi · AI-generated script, voice and captions
· pages and figures unaltered
Made with Paperi.
Drop in a research PDF — get a narrated video walkthrough like this one,
with highlights that follow the narration. Free to start.
Beibei Xiong, Christine Stirling, Daniel X. Bailey, Melinda Martin‐Khan
A hospital can have skilled professionals, a national care standard, and still fail to give every patient one joined-up plan. This study found that confidence was high—but the support needed to make care consistent was not.Australian hospital professionals generally felt confident delivering comprehensive care—but the weakest point was creating one shared care plan, and nearly one in five reported that none of their unit’s patients had one.
Cancer care is not only about choosing a treatment. Patients and families also need someone to help connect medical decisions, daily problems, and the long stretch after treatment. This study asks whether oncology nurses could fill that missing role in Israel.Israel faces a large cancer burden, yet oncology clinical nurse specialists have not been established there. This study asks what nurses and physicians think such a role could contribute—and where its boundaries should be drawn.
Zihao Fan, Zhi Du, Jinrong Fu, Ying Zhou, Pengyu Zhang, Chuning Shi, Yingxian Sun
Heart disease remains the world's leading cause of illness and death, yet the familiar risk calculators can misjudge some people. A computer trained on many kinds of health information may offer a better warning.What if the usual cardiovascular risk calculators are leaving useful heart signals on the table? This study tests whether machine learning can combine routine factors with detailed ECG and echocardiography data to improve prediction.