A survey of Indian Health Service and tribal health providers' colorectal cancer screening knowledge, perceptions, and practices.

Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved (Impact Factor: 1.1). 02/2011; 22(1):243-57. DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2011.0014
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Provider recommendation is critical for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation, yet few data exist on practices of providers serving American Indians and Alaska Natives. We examined Indian Health Service (IHS) and tribal provider practices, beliefs about screening efficacy, and perceptions of barriers.
We developed a Web-based questionnaire and recruited respondents via electronic distribution lists. We generated descriptive statistics by region, provider type, and workplace setting.
Most respondents (77%) recommend starting CRC screening of average-risk patients at age 50; however, 22% recommend flexible sigmoidoscopy and 43% colonoscopy at intervals inconsistent with national guidelines. Of those recommending fecal occult blood test (FOBT), 23% use a single, in-office FOBT card as their only FOBT method. Respondents reported barriers to screening to include underutilized reminder systems and inadequate resources.
Indian Health Service/tribal providers are knowledgeable about when to begin CRC screening; however, education about the appropriate use and frequency of CRC tests is needed.

Download full-text


Available from: Donald Haverkamp, Jun 26, 2015
4 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is of particular importance in American Indian/Alaska Native women because of the higher rate of cervical cancer incidence compared to non-Hispanic white women. To better understand HPV vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and practices among providers working with American Indian/Alaska Native populations, we conducted a provider survey in Indian Health Service, Tribal and Urban Indian (I/T/U) facilities. During December 2009 and January 2010, we distributed an on-line survey to providers working in I/T/U facilities. We also conducted semistructured interviews with a subset of providers. There were 268 surveys and 51 provider interviews completed. Providers were more likely to administer vaccine to 13-18-year-olds (96%) than to other recommended age groups (89% to 11-12-year-olds and 64% to 19-26-year-olds). Perceived barriers to HPV vaccination for 9-18-year-olds included parental safety and moral/religious concerns. Funding was the main barrier for 19-26-year-olds. Overall, providers were very knowledgeable about HPV, although nearly half of all providers and most obstetricians/gynecologists thought that a pregnancy test should precede vaccination. Sixty-four percent of providers of patients receiving the vaccine do not routinely discuss the importance of cervical cancer screening. Recommendations for HPV vaccination have been broadly implemented in I/T/U settings. Vaccination barriers identified by I/T/U providers are similar to those reported in other provider surveys. Provider education efforts should stress that pregnancy testing is not needed before vaccination and the importance of communicating the need for continued cervical cancer screening.
    Journal of Women's Health 02/2012; 21(4):372-8. DOI:10.1089/jwh.2011.3417 · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized, especially in low income, high minority populations. We examined the effect test-specific barriers have on colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) completion, what rationales are given for non-completion, and what "switch" patterns exist when participants are allowed to switch from one test to another. Low income adults who were not up-to-date with CRC screening guidelines were recruited from safety-net clinics and offered colonoscopy or FIT (n = 418). Follow up telephone surveys assessed test-specific barriers. Test completion was determined from patient medical records. For subjects who desired colonoscopy at baseline, finding a time to come in and transportation applied more to non-completers than completers (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). For participants who initially wanted FIT, keeping track of cards, never putting stool on cards, and not remembering to mail cards back applied more to non-completers than completers (p = 0.003, p = 0.006, and p < 0.001, respectively). The most common rationale given for not completing screening was a desire for the other screening modality: 7 % of patients who initially preferred screening by FIT completed colonoscopy, while 8 % of patients who initially preferred screening by colonoscopy completed FIT. We conclude that test-specific barriers apply more to subjects who did not complete CRC screening. As a common rationale for test non-completion is a desire to receive a different screening modality, our findings suggest screening rates could be increased by giving patients the opportunity to switch tests after an initial choice is made.
    Journal of Community Health 09/2012; 38(2). DOI:10.1007/s10900-012-9612-6 · 1.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: Physician recommendation plays a crucial role in receiving endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). This study explored factors associated with racial/ethnic differences in rates of screening recommendation. Methods: Data on 5900 adults eligible for endoscopic screening were obtained from the National Health Interview Survey. Odds ratios of receiving an endoscopy recommendation were calculated for selected variables. Planned, sequenced logistic regressions were conducted to examine the extent to which socioeconomic and health care variables account for racial/ethnic disparities in recommendation rates. Results: Differential rates were observed for CRC screening and screening recommendations among racial/ethnic groups. Compared with Whites, Hispanics were 34% less likely (P < .01) and Blacks were 26% less likely (P < .05) to receive this recommendation. The main predictors that emerged in sequenced analysis were education for Hispanics and Blacks and income for Blacks. After accounting for the effects of usual source of care, insurance coverage, and education, the disparity reduced and became statistically insignificant. Conclusions: Socioeconomic status and access to health care may explain major racial/ethnic disparities in CRC screening recommendation rates.
    American Journal of Public Health 05/2013; 103(9). DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2012.301034 · 4.55 Impact Factor
Show more