Skip to content
Implementation Science at UW

Keywords: Reminders

✪ How pharmacists would design and implement a community pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program

Authors:

Austin R Waters, Katherine Meehan, Dana L Atkins, Annika H Ittes, Renée M Ferrari, Catherine L Rohweder, Mary Wangen, Rachel M Ceballos, Rachel B Issaka, Daniel S Reuland, Stephanie B Wheeler, Alison T Brenner, and Parth D Shah

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: April 2024

Read the full text in the open access journal Preventive Oncology & Epidemiology

Abstract:

Background

Distributing CRC screening through pharmacies, a highly accessible health service, may create opportunities for more equitable access to CRC screening. However, providing CRC screening in a new context introduces a substantial implementation challenge.

Methods

We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with community pharmacists practicing in Washington state and North Carolina about distributing fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) to patients in the pharmacy. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide analysis.

Results

Pharmacists believed that delivering FITs was highly compatible with their environment, workflow, and scope of practice. While knowledge about FIT eligibility criteria varied, pharmacists felt comfortable screening patients. They identified standardized eligibility criteria, patient-facing educational materials, and continuing education as essential design features. Pharmacists proposed adapting existing pharmacy electronic health record systems for patient reminders/prompts to facilitate FIT completion. While pharmacists felt confident that they could discuss test results with patients, they also expressed a need for stronger communication and care coordination with primary care providers.

Discussion

When designing a pharmacy-based CRC screening program, pharmacists desired programmatic procedures to fit their current knowledge and context. Findings indicate that if proper attention is given to multi-level factors, FIT delivery can be extended to pharmacies.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ What’s the “secret sauce”? How implementation variation affects the success of colorectal cancer screening outreach

Authors:

Jennifer Coury, Edward J. Miech, Patricia Styer, Amanda F. Petrik, Kelly E. Coates, Beverly B. Green, Laura-Mae Baldwin, Jean A. Shapiro & Gloria D. Coronado

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2021

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science Communications

Abstract:

Background

Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) programs can improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, but health systems vary how they implement (i.e., adapt) these programs for their organizations. A health insurance plan implemented a mailed FIT program (named BeneFIT), and participating health systems could adapt the program. This multi-method study explored which program adaptations might have resulted in higher screening rates.

Methods

First, we conducted a descriptive analysis of CRC screening rates by key health system characteristics and program adaptations. Second, we generated an overall model by fitting a weighted regression line to our data. Third, we applied Configurational Comparative Methods (CCMs) to determine how combinations of conditions were linked to higher screening rates. The main outcome measure was CRC screening rates.

Results

Seventeen health systems took part in at least 1 year of BeneFIT. The overall screening completion rate was 20% (4–28%) in year 1 and 25% (12–35%) in year 2 of the program. Health systems that used two or more adaptations had higher screening rates, and no single adaptation clearly led to higher screening rates. In year 1, small systems, with just one clinic, that used phone reminders (n = 2) met the implementation success threshold (≥ 19% screening rate) while systems with > 1 clinic were successful when offering a patient incentive (n = 4), scrubbing mailing lists (n = 4), or allowing mailed FIT returns with no other adaptations (n = 1). In year 2, larger systems with 2–4 clinics were successful with a phone reminder (n = 4) or a patient incentive (n = 3). Of the 10 systems that implemented BeneFIT in both years, seven improved their CRC screening rates in year 2.

Conclusions

Health systems can choose among many adaptations and successfully implement a health plan’s mailed FIT program. Different combinations of adaptations led to success with health system size emerging as an important contextual factor.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

Assessing Levels and Correlates of Implementation of Evidence-Based Approaches for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Study With Federally Qualified Health Centers

Authors:

Timothy J. Walker, Betsy Risendal, Michelle C. Kegler, Daniela B. Friedman, Bryan J. Weiner, Rebecca S. Williams, Shin-Ping Tu, and Maria E. Fernandez

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Published: July 2018

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Health Education & Behavior