Characterizing Clinics With Differential Changes in the Screening Rate in the Colorectal Cancer Control Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Add terms to the query box

Query box

Help
Clear All
i

Characterizing Clinics With Differential Changes in the Screening Rate in the Colorectal Cancer Control Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Filetype[PDF-104.38 KB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      Cancer
    • Description:
      BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funds the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in primary care clinics by implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs). This study examined differences in clinic characteristics and implementation efforts among clinics with differential changes in screening rates over time. METHODS: CRCCP clinic data collected by the CDC were used. The outcome was the clinic status (highest quartile [Q4] vs lowest quartile [Q1]), which was based on the absolute screening rate change between the first and second program years. Five clinic characteristic variables and 12 clinic-level CRCCP variables (eg, EBIs) were assessed in bivariable analyses, and logistic regression was used to determine significant predictors of the outcome. RESULTS: Each group included 78 clinics (N = 156). Clinics with a Q4 status saw a 14.9 percentage point increase in the screening rate, whereas clinics with a Q1 status experienced a 9.1 percentage point decline. Q4s were more likely than Q1s to have a CRC champion, implement 4 EBIs versus fewer EBIs, implement at least 1 new EBI, and increase the number of implemented EBIs. The adjusted odds of Q4 status were 5.3 times greater (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9–14.9) if a clinic implemented an additional EBI. The adjusted odds of Q4 status increased to 7.1 (95% CI, 2.2–23.1) if a clinic implemented 2 to 4 additional EBIs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing new EBIs or enhancing existing ones improves CRC screening rates. Additionally, clinics with lower screening rates had greater rate increases and may have benefited more from the CRCCP.
    • Pubmed ID:
      33301173
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC9242539
    • Document Type:
    • Place as Subject:
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov