利用多部门合作在非裔美国人社区开展结直肠癌教育和筛查:协议和初步结果。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Cancer Education Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w
Jungyoon Kim, Hongying Daisy Dai, Tzeyu Michaud, Sachi Verma, Keyonna M King, John W Ewing, Grace Mabiala-Maye, Paul Estabrooks
{"title":"利用多部门合作在非裔美国人社区开展结直肠癌教育和筛查:协议和初步结果。","authors":"Jungyoon Kim, Hongying Daisy Dai, Tzeyu Michaud, Sachi Verma, Keyonna M King, John W Ewing, Grace Mabiala-Maye, Paul Estabrooks","doi":"10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) awareness and screening rates are still low in African Americans (AAs), especially for those who do not have regular access to health care. We established a multi-sector community partnership between academia, health system, cancer advocacy, and local county treasurer's office (CTO), to test a pilot CRC screening intervention using a tailored educational brochure and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Participants were recruited at a local CTO in an urban midwestern region. Once eligible, participants were assigned to 2-by-2 intervention arms by educational strategy (brochure vs. no brochure) and FIT provision strategy (direct provision by onsite staff vs. indirect provision via phone/online request). We compared the effect of different strategies on FIT return rates. Of 1500 individuals approached, 212 were eligible for the study. The final sample consisted of 209 participants who were predominantly men (57%) and AAs (85%). No differences were found in the return rates by educational brochure (24% [brochure] vs. 23% [no brochure]; p = 0.82). In regard to FIT provision strategy, direct FIT provision yielded higher return rates than indirect provision (31% vs. 15%; p = 0.01). When the four groups were compared, direct provision with education brochure yielded the highest return rates (33.9%), followed by direct provision only (27.5%), indirect provision only (18%), and indirect provision with a brochure (12.2%). For community-based CRC screening intervention using stool-based test, the direct provision of FIT kits with educational brochure outperforms the other three strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leveraging Multi-Sectoral Partnership for Colorectal Cancer Education and Screening in the African American Community: A Protocol and Preliminary Results.\",\"authors\":\"Jungyoon Kim, Hongying Daisy Dai, Tzeyu Michaud, Sachi Verma, Keyonna M King, John W Ewing, Grace Mabiala-Maye, Paul Estabrooks\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) awareness and screening rates are still low in African Americans (AAs), especially for those who do not have regular access to health care. We established a multi-sector community partnership between academia, health system, cancer advocacy, and local county treasurer's office (CTO), to test a pilot CRC screening intervention using a tailored educational brochure and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Participants were recruited at a local CTO in an urban midwestern region. Once eligible, participants were assigned to 2-by-2 intervention arms by educational strategy (brochure vs. no brochure) and FIT provision strategy (direct provision by onsite staff vs. indirect provision via phone/online request). We compared the effect of different strategies on FIT return rates. Of 1500 individuals approached, 212 were eligible for the study. The final sample consisted of 209 participants who were predominantly men (57%) and AAs (85%). No differences were found in the return rates by educational brochure (24% [brochure] vs. 23% [no brochure]; p = 0.82). In regard to FIT provision strategy, direct FIT provision yielded higher return rates than indirect provision (31% vs. 15%; p = 0.01). When the four groups were compared, direct provision with education brochure yielded the highest return rates (33.9%), followed by direct provision only (27.5%), indirect provision only (18%), and indirect provision with a brochure (12.2%). For community-based CRC screening intervention using stool-based test, the direct provision of FIT kits with educational brochure outperforms the other three strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-024-02506-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

非裔美国人(AAs)对结肠直肠癌(CRC)的认识和筛查率仍然很低,尤其是那些无法定期获得医疗保健服务的非裔美国人。我们在学术界、卫生系统、癌症宣传机构和当地县财政局(CTO)之间建立了一个多部门社区合作关系,利用定制的教育手册和粪便免疫化学检验(FIT)测试一项试验性的 CRC 筛查干预措施。参与者在中西部城市地区的当地 CTO 处招募。符合条件后,参与者按教育策略(宣传册与无宣传册)和 FIT 提供策略(现场工作人员直接提供与通过电话/在线请求间接提供)被分配到 2×2 的干预组。我们比较了不同策略对 FIT 返回率的影响。在接触的 1500 人中,有 212 人符合研究条件。最终的样本包括 209 名参与者,他们主要是男性(57%)和机甲族(85%)。教育小册子的回收率没有差异(24% [小册子] vs. 23% [无小册子];p = 0.82)。就提供 FIT 的策略而言,直接提供 FIT 的回访率高于间接提供(31% 对 15%;p = 0.01)。在对四组进行比较时,直接提供并附带教育手册的回访率最高(33.9%),其次是仅直接提供(27.5%)、仅间接提供(18%)和间接提供并附带手册(12.2%)。就使用粪便检验的社区儿童癌筛查干预而言,直接提供 FIT 套件和教育手册的效果优于其他三种策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Leveraging Multi-Sectoral Partnership for Colorectal Cancer Education and Screening in the African American Community: A Protocol and Preliminary Results.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) awareness and screening rates are still low in African Americans (AAs), especially for those who do not have regular access to health care. We established a multi-sector community partnership between academia, health system, cancer advocacy, and local county treasurer's office (CTO), to test a pilot CRC screening intervention using a tailored educational brochure and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Participants were recruited at a local CTO in an urban midwestern region. Once eligible, participants were assigned to 2-by-2 intervention arms by educational strategy (brochure vs. no brochure) and FIT provision strategy (direct provision by onsite staff vs. indirect provision via phone/online request). We compared the effect of different strategies on FIT return rates. Of 1500 individuals approached, 212 were eligible for the study. The final sample consisted of 209 participants who were predominantly men (57%) and AAs (85%). No differences were found in the return rates by educational brochure (24% [brochure] vs. 23% [no brochure]; p = 0.82). In regard to FIT provision strategy, direct FIT provision yielded higher return rates than indirect provision (31% vs. 15%; p = 0.01). When the four groups were compared, direct provision with education brochure yielded the highest return rates (33.9%), followed by direct provision only (27.5%), indirect provision only (18%), and indirect provision with a brochure (12.2%). For community-based CRC screening intervention using stool-based test, the direct provision of FIT kits with educational brochure outperforms the other three strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Education
Journal of Cancer Education 医学-医学:信息
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues. Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care. We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts. Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited. Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants. Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.
期刊最新文献
A Cancer Patient Navigation Training Program for Limited-Resource Settings: Results from 5 Years of Training. A National Survey of Obstetrics and Gynecology Resident Perspectives on Their Preparedness to Provide Care for Underserved Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies. Didactic Instruction's Impact on Medicolegal Quality of Radiation Oncology Resident Physician Documentation. Leveraging Multi-Sectoral Partnership for Colorectal Cancer Education and Screening in the African American Community: A Protocol and Preliminary Results. Experiences and Comfort of Young Cancer Patients Discussing Cannabis with Their Providers: Insights from a Survey at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1