Leveraging an Implementation Science Framework to Adapt and Scale a Patient Navigator Intervention to Improve Mammography Screening Outreach in a New Community

Simon, Melissa A.; O’Brian, Catherine A.; Kanoon, Jacqueline M.; Venegas, Alnierys; Ignoffo, Stacy; Picard, Charlotte; Allgood, Kristi L.; Tom, Laura S.; Margellos-Anast, Helen

doi:10.1007/s13187-019-01492-8

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[106] Scaling out can involve adapting interventions to either new populations, new delivery systems, or both; cancer studies that are beginning to appear in the literature include the "scale out" of a breast cancer screening program to a broader population group. [107] Although further testing and refinement of this innovation are needed, we suggest that scaling out could be highly relevant to psycho-oncology. This type of research design…”

Section: 51mentioning

confidence: 99%

An implementation science primer for psycho-oncology: translating robust evidence into practice

Rankin

Butow

Hack

et al. 2019

Journal of Psychosocial Oncology Research &Amp; Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is broadly acknowledged that the next global challenge for psycho-oncology is the implementation of robust evidence-based treatments into routine clinical practice. There is little guidance or texts specific to psycho-oncology to guide researchers and clinicians about implementation science and how to optimally accelerate the translation of evidence into routine practice. This article aims to provide a primer in implementation science for psycho-oncology researchers and clinicians. Methods: We introduce core concepts and principles of implementation science. These include definitions of terms, understanding the quality gap and the need for solid evidence-based interventions. Results: The conceptual models, frameworks, and theories that are used in implementation research are outlined, along with evaluative study designs, implementation strategies, and outcomes. We provide a brief overview of the importance of engaging teams with diverse expertise in research and engaging key stakeholders throughout implementation planning, conduct, and evaluation. The article identifies opportunities to accelerate the implementation of evidencebased psychosocial interventions. Opportunities for greater collaboration across disciplines are highlighted. Examples from psychooncology and the broader oncology literature are included to help operationalize concepts. Conclusion: This article describes the fundamental concepts and principles of implementation science for a psycho-oncology audience, to increase the number and quality of implementation studies across the discipline.

show abstract

Section: 51mentioning

confidence: 99%

An implementation science primer for psycho-oncology: translating robust evidence into practice

Rankin

Butow

Hack

et al. 2019

Journal of Psychosocial Oncology Research &Amp; Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After removing duplicates, 19,095 studies underwent title and abstract screening, and then 1541 full‐text studies were assessed for eligibility. In total, 699 studies were included, of which 144 were unique intervention studies included in the current analysis (representing 150 articles) 23–172 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fewer studies assessed fidelity (n = 7), cost (n = 6), feasibility (n = 5), appropriateness (n = 4), sustainability (n = 3), adoption (n = 2), and adaptation (n = 1). Only eight studies (5.6%) reported the use of an implementation science theory, model, or framework 72,74,91,100,133,143,147,156.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review

Korn

Walsh‐Bailey

Correa-Mendez

et al. 2023

CA A Cancer J Clinicians

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There remains a need to synthesize linkages between social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer screening to reduce persistent inequities contributing to the US cancer burden. The authors conducted a systematic review of US‐based breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening intervention studies to summarize how SDOH have been considered in interventions and relationships between SDOH and screening. Five databases were searched for peer‐reviewed research articles published in English between 2010 and 2021. The Covidence software platform was used to screen articles and extract data using a standardized template. Data items included study and intervention characteristics, SDOH intervention components and measures, and screening outcomes. The findings were summarized using descriptive statistics and narratives. The review included 144 studies among diverse population groups. SDOH interventions increased screening rates overall by a median of 8.4 percentage points (interquartile interval, 1.8–18.8 percentage points). The objective of most interventions was to increase community demand (90.3%) and access (84.0%) to screening. SDOH interventions related to health care access and quality were most prevalent (227 unique intervention components). Other SDOH, including educational, social/community, environmental, and economic factors, were less common (90, 52, 21, and zero intervention components, respectively). Studies that included analyses of health policy, access to care, and lower costs yielded the largest proportions of favorable associations with screening outcomes. SDOH were predominantly measured at the individual level. This review describes how SDOH have been considered in the design and evaluation of cancer screening interventions and effect sizes for SDOH interventions. Findings may guide future intervention and implementation research aiming to reduce US screening inequities.

show abstract

“…Group-based care, for example, allows for longer discussions about patient perspectives and their role in patients' behaviors and decision making. 86 , 87 Similarly, engaging non-clinicians such as doulas and community health workers, 88 , 89 who develop longitudinal trusted relationships with patients, may help the larger care team to better understand, appreciate, and engage with patient perspectives. 73 , 74 As states expand coverage, 90 , 91 these essential workers will play a greater role in bridging the historically disparate social worlds of community members and clinicians.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Social Contexts of Birthing People with Public- and Private-Payer Prenatal Care: Illuminating an Understudied Aspect of the Patient Experience

Garrett

Simon

2022

Health Equity

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: In pursuit of more equitable and person-centered health care, patients and professional medical societies increasingly call for better clinician understanding of patients' perspectives and social contexts. A foundational but understudied aspect of patients' social contexts are the ideas they encounter about health-related behaviors. We investigated this aspect of the social contexts of birthing people, comparing those with public versus private insurance to discover setting-specific insights. Methods: Based on ethnographic fieldwork, we created an original survey featuring 29 statements about 12 prenatal, perinatal, and postpartum health behaviors (e.g., drinking alcohol, epidural use, breastfeeding). Participants were 248 individuals receiving prenatal care in Northern California in 2009–2011, split evenly between public- and private-payer coverage. Participants reported whether they were familiar or unfamiliar with each statement. Results: Ninety-eight percent of all participants had heard contradictory ideas about ≥1 health behavior (mean=3.9 behaviors for public- and 5.4 for private-coverage respondents). For 20 of the 29 behavior-related ideas, exposure varied significantly by coverage type. Among other differences, public-coverage respondents were much more familiar with ideas related to risk and constrained autonomy (e.g., that serious perinatal complications are common; that new mothers should try to breastfeed even if they do not want to). Conclusions: Birthing people are exposed to a wide range of ideas about health behaviors, many of which vary by the structural systems in which they are embedded. Understanding and engaging this complexity can help clinicians to provide more respectful, person-centered, and equitable maternity care.

show abstract

Leveraging an Implementation Science Framework to Adapt and Scale a Patient Navigator Intervention to Improve Mammography Screening Outreach in a New Community

Cited by 6 publications

References 26 publications

An implementation science primer for psycho-oncology: translating robust evidence into practice

An implementation science primer for psycho-oncology: translating robust evidence into practice

Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review

The Social Contexts of Birthing People with Public- and Private-Payer Prenatal Care: Illuminating an Understudied Aspect of the Patient Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About