Article

Mass screening in low-income populations: The challenges of securing diagnostic and treatment services in a national cancer screening program

University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law (Impact Factor: 0.96). 07/2000; 25(3):451-71. DOI: 10.1215/03616878-25-3-451
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Funding for many mass screening programs for low-income and uninsured populations provides resources for screening tests, yet only rarely does it provide coverage for necessary follow-up diagnostic and treatment services. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP), a federally funded initiative that provides cancer screening to low-income uninsured and underinsured women, covers some diagnostic follow-up tests and no treatment services. We conducted in-depth case studies of seven state programs participating in the NBCCEDP to investigate the strategies and approaches being used to secure diagnostic and treatment services. The results suggest that the program relies on a patchwork of resources--at state and local levels--to provide diagnostic and treatment services. This includes a number of components of local safety nets, all of which are unstable and have uncertain futures. Public health disease-screening initiatives need to reconsider the feasibility of continued reliance on case-by-case appeals to the local safety net for diagnostic follow-up and treatment services.

0 Followers
 · 
37 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program is a multifaceted, federal program that provides breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic services to low-income women, but does not cover the costs of treatment. This study used a fixed-effects, longitudinal time-series research design (from 1995 to 2005) to evaluate the impact of a Medicaid expansion aimed at covering treatment for program clients, enacted via the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act of 2000. In summary, the Treatment Act of 2000 had some positive impacts, including a 12.8% decrease in the average number of days to definitive cervical diagnosis for White women. Nonetheless, the Treatment Act also had some negative impacts on the timing of diagnosis and treatment services, including a significant increase in the average time between a diagnosis of cervical dysplasia or cancer and the initiation of treatment for Black and Hispanic women (7-15 days across age groups). The Treatment Act was also associated with a 9% decrease in the probability that Black women would initiate treatment within 60 days of a cervical diagnosis (-.094; 95% confidence interval [CI] -.178 to -.01). As such, although the Treatment Act had no impact on the proportion of clients who initiated breast cancer treatment within 60 days, it reduced the probability that Black women initiated cervical treatment within an accepted benchmark for timely care.
    Women s Health Issues 07/2009; 19(4):221-31. DOI:10.1016/j.whi.2009.04.001 · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We obtained population estimates of the prevalence of lack of diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) result and assessed the role of sociodemographic, access, and risk perception factors on follow-up of abnormal tests. We used data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey cancer control supplement. For 3,310 men aged 40 or older with a PSA test, 463 men reported an abnormal PSA test. Outcomes were abnormal PSA and lack of diagnostic follow-up in the latter group. Covariates for logistic regression included sociodemographic variables (age, race/ethnicity, and education), access to care (health insurance and usual source), and risk of cancer (family history and perceived risk). Survey analysis procedures accounted for the complex survey design. Abnormal PSA results were associated with age, family history, and perceived risk of cancer. Approximately 15% of men with abnormal PSA tests reported no follow-up. The estimated number was 423,549 (95% confidence interval [CI] 317,755, 529,343). No follow-up was more likely in Hispanic men (odds ratio [OR] = 2.21, 95% CI 1.04, 4.70) and men without insurance (OR=6.56, 95% CI 2.02, 21.29), but less likely in men with a family history of prostate cancer or higher perceived risk of cancer. Substantial numbers of men had no follow-up of abnormal PSA tests. Primary care physicians should assess continuity of care following abnormal PSA results. Data about prostate cancer screening and follow-up are needed to support clinical and policy decisions.
    Public Health Reports 124(5):718-25. · 1.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Screening Demonstration Program in 2005. To assess the feasibility of providing community-based colorectal cancer screening, CDC is conducting a multiple-case study as part of a larger evaluation effort. This article highlights key facilitators and challenges common to the five programs studied during the start-up period. The multiple-case study that includes all five program sites is being conducted during the 3-year program as part of process evaluation efforts. Data collection for program start-up occurred during August 2005 through September 2006. Data include approximately 70 interviews with program staff and stakeholders, document review, and observations. Both case-specific and cross-case analyses were conducted. On the basis of the cross-case analysis, we identified four factors that facilitated program start-up and four factors that challenged program start-up. Facilitating factors included 1) pre-existing program infrastructure, 2) partnerships, 3) clinical expertise, and 4) program champions. Factors challenging program start-up included 1) contracts with endoscopists, 2) resources for treating medical complications of screening and for cancer treatment, 3) administrative barriers, and 4) resource limitations. Additionally, preplanning was critical, allowing programs to efficiently initiate activities once funds became available. The most important facilitator identified was the ability to build on pre-existing infrastructure, which provided experienced staff, partnerships, and provider relationships, as well as aided program integration with other chronic disease programs. Results also suggest that substantial planning and partnership development can begin before funds are secured to implement a colorectal cancer screening program.
    Preventing chronic disease 05/2008; 5(2):A39. · 1.96 Impact Factor