Clinic Type and Patient Characteristics Affecting Time to Resolution After an Abnormal Cancer-Screening Exam

Research shows that multilevel factors influence health care delivery and patient outcomes. The goal of this study was to examine how clinic type (primary care clinic within an academic medical center (AMC) or federally-qualified health center (FQHC)) and patient characteristics influence time to resolution (TTR) among individuals enrolled in a patient navigation (PN) intervention. Data were obtained from the Ohio Patient Navigation Research Project, a group randomized trial in which 862 patients from 18 clinics in Columbus, OH participated. Patient's TTR after an abnormal breast, cervical, or colorectal test and the clinics' patient and provider characteristics were obtained. Descriptive statistics and Cox shared frailty proportional hazards regression models of TTR were used to analyze the data. The mean patient age was 44.8 years and 71% of patients were White. In models adjusted for study arm, the interaction between time and study arm and a clinic random effect, FQHC patients had a 39% lower rate of resolution than AMC patients (HR = 0.61, p = 0.004); college educated patients had an 87% higher rate of resolution than patients with less than a high school education (HR = 1.87, p = 0.0007); privately insured patients had a 79% higher rate of resolution than uninsured patients (HR = 1.79, p < 0.0001); patients with annual incomes ≥ $50,000 had a 51% higher rate of resolution than patients with annual incomes < $10,000 (HR = 1.51, p = 0.02); and there was a 4% increase in the rate of resolution for each five year increase in patient age (HR = 1.04, p = 0.004). After using multiple imputation to impute income and insurance status where missing, factors that potentially confounded the effect of clinic type on TTR were assessed using forward selection. After adjustment for patient insurance status, education level and age, clinic type was not significantly associated with TTR. Controlling for clinic type, patient insurance status and age were significantly associated with TTR (p = 0.005 and p = 0.01, respectively) and patient education level was marginally significant (p = 0.06). These results suggest that TTR among individuals participating in PN programs is influenced by multiple socioeconomic (SES) patient-level factors rather than clinic type. Consequently, PN interventions should be tailored to address SES factors that influence TTR within patient populations.

[1]  Amanda F. Petrik,et al.  Clinical Perspectives on Colorectal Cancer Screening at Latino-Serving Federally Qualified Health Centers , 2015, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[2]  B. Thompson,et al.  Cancer Screening at a Federally Qualified Health Center: A Qualitative Study on Organizational Challenges in the Era of the Patient-Centered Medical Home , 2013, Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health.

[3]  Jeffrey R. Harris,et al.  Opportunities for Improving Cancer Prevention at Federally Qualified Health Centers , 2013, Journal of Cancer Education.

[4]  E. Calhoun,et al.  Patient barriers to follow-up care for breast and cervical cancer abnormalities. , 2013, Journal of women's health.

[5]  L. Goldman,et al.  Timeliness of Abnormal Screening and Diagnostic Mammography Follow-up at Facilities Serving Vulnerable Women , 2013, Medical care.

[6]  C. Desimone,et al.  Inconsistencies between medical records and patient-reported recommendations for follow-up after abnormal Pap tests. , 2013, Journal of women's health.

[7]  E. Seiber,et al.  The Ohio Patient Navigation Research Program: Does the American Cancer Society Patient Navigation Model Improve Time to Resolution in Patients with Abnormal Screening Tests? , 2012, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[8]  David R. Holtgrave,et al.  Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings , 2012, Cancer.

[9]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Language Barriers, Location of Care, and Delays in Follow-up of Abnormal Mammograms , 2012, Medical care.

[10]  A. Trentham-Dietz,et al.  Influence of race, insurance, socioeconomic status, and hospital type on receipt of guideline-concordant adjuvant systemic therapy for locoregional breast cancers. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  S. Haneuse,et al.  Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammogram: variability of facilities. , 2011, Radiology.

[12]  B. Leake,et al.  What influences diagnostic delay in low-income women with breast cancer? , 2011, Journal of women's health.

[13]  R. Palmer,et al.  Breast cancer screening practices of safety net clinics: Results of a needs assessment study , 2011, BMC women's health.

[14]  P. Cook,et al.  Evaluation of a patient navigation program. , 2011, Clinical journal of oncology nursing.

[15]  L. Goldman,et al.  Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography at Facilities Serving Vulnerable Women , 2011, Medical care.

[16]  K. Freund,et al.  Abstract CN03-04: Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention , 2010 .

[17]  P. Ganz,et al.  Low-Income Women with Abnormal Breast Findings: Results of a Randomized Trial to Increase Rates of Diagnostic Resolution , 2010, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[18]  D. Heron,et al.  Factors associated with patient navigators' time spent on reducing barriers to cancer treatment. , 2008, Journal of the National Medical Association.

[19]  O. Carrasquillo,et al.  Racial/ethnic disparities in time to follow-up after an abnormal mammogram. , 2008, Journal of women's health.

[20]  K. Freund,et al.  Improving follow‐up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population , 2007, Cancer.

[21]  Robert A Lowe,et al.  Association Between Primary Care Practice Characteristics and Emergency Department Use in a Medicaid Managed Care Organization , 2005, Medical care.

[22]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Current realities of delivering mammography services in the community: do challenges with staffing and scheduling exist? , 2005, Radiology.

[23]  Nancy Breen,et al.  What factors are associated with diagnostic follow-up after abnormal mammograms? Findings from a U.S. National Survey. , 2004, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[24]  Amy Leader,et al.  Is the Promise of Cancer-Screening Programs Being Compromised? Quality of Follow-Up Care after Abnormal Screening Results , 2003, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[25]  V. Shavers,et al.  Racial and ethnic disparities in the receipt of cancer treatment. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[26]  C. T. Orleans,et al.  Does the chronic care model serve also as a template for improving prevention? , 2001, The Milbank quarterly.

[27]  David M. Murray,et al.  Design and Analysis of Group- Randomized Trials , 1998 .

[28]  K. Nasseri,et al.  Low-Income Women with Cervical Abnormalities: Individual and System Factors Affecting Follow-up , 1995 .

[29]  J Z Ayanian,et al.  The relation between health insurance coverage and clinical outcomes among women with breast cancer. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  Barrett Mj,et al.  The supply of mammography resources in West Virginia. , 1992 .

[31]  I. Rosenstock The Health Belief Model and Preventive Health Behavior , 1974 .

[32]  M. Ballo,et al.  Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings: An economic evaluation , 2013 .

[33]  Michael Halpern,et al.  Association of Insurance with Cancer Care Utilization and Outcomes , 2008, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[34]  B. Israel,et al.  Social networks and social support. , 2008 .

[35]  B. Xie,et al.  Patient navigation and case management following an abnormal mammogram: a randomized clinical trial. , 2007, Preventive medicine.

[36]  K. Kerlikowske Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography , 2005, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[37]  J. Strzelczyk,et al.  Disparities in adherence to recommended followup on screening mammography: interaction of sociodemographic factors. , 2002, Ethnicity & disease.

[38]  H. Freeman,et al.  Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved. , 1995, Cancer practice.

[39]  M. Brown,et al.  The supply of mammography resources in West Virginia. , 1992, The West Virginia medical journal.