RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Three current and former awardees of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program launched integrated cancer screening strategies to better coordinate multiple cancer screenings (e.g., breast, cervical, colorectal). By integrating the strategies, efficiencies of administration and provision of screenings can be increased and costs can be reduced. This paper shares findings from these strategies and describes their effects. METHODS: The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare developed a Baseline Assessment Checklist for six health systems to assess the current state of policies regarding cancer screening. We analyzed the checklist and reported the percentage of checklist components completed. In Rhode Island, we collaborated with a nurse-patient navigator, who promoted cancer screening, to collect details on patient navigation activities and program costs. We then described the program and reported total costs and cost per activity. In Nebraska, we described the experience of the state in administering an integrated contracts payment model across colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening and reported cost per person screened. Across all awardees, we interviewed key stakeholders. RESULTS: In Idaho, results from the checklist offered guidance on areas for enhancement before integrated cancer screening strategies, but identified challenges, including lack of capacity, limited staff availability, and staff turnover. In Rhode Island, 76.1% of 1023 patient navigation activities were for colorectal cancer screening only, with a much smaller proportion devoted to breast and cervical cancer screening. Although the patient navigator found the discussions around multiple cancer screening efficient, patients were not always willing to discuss all cancer screenings. Nebraska changed its payment system from fee-for-service to fixed cost subawards with its local health departments, which integrated cancer screening funding. Screening uptake improved for breast and cervical cancer but was mixed for colorectal cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the case studies show that there are barriers and facilitators to integrating approaches to increasing cancer screening among primary care facilities. However, more research could further elucidate the viability and practicality of integrated cancer screening programs.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Idaho's Women's Health Check (WHC) Program provides breast and cervical cancer screening to under- and uninsured women via funding from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP). Because WHC serves populations with less access to health care, this study evaluated time from breast cancer diagnosis to treatment for women enrolled in the WHC program and linked to Cancer Data Registry of Idaho (CDRI) case data (WHC-linked) and the remainder of female Idaho resident breast cases. METHODS: Among Idaho residents aged 50-64 years diagnosed during 2011-2017 with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer, we assessed differences in the median time from definitive diagnosis to treatment initiation overall and by demographic and tumor characteristics, and differences in the distribution of demographic and tumor-related variables between 231 WHC-linked and 3,040 non-linked breast cancer cases. RESULTS: WHC-linked cases were significantly less likely to be non-Hispanic white, and more likely to live in poorer census tracts, be diagnosed at a later stage, and be treated with mastectomy. Most WHC-linked (92%) and non-linked women (94%) began treatment within 60 days of diagnosis; no differences in time to treatment were observed. CONCLUSION: Disparities in the interval from definitive diagnosis to breast cancer treatment initiation were not observed for women enrolled in the WHC program relative to other Idaho women.
