Chapter One:
Significance of the Project:
Contextualizing CRC Screening Improvement:
Increasing screening rates is one of the most critical efforts to reduce the significant burden of colorectal cancer (CRC), which continues to be one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide (Vilaro et al.,2021). By accentuating the venture’s importance in CRC screening, we feature shutting current gaps in screening take-up and help with early identification, further developing the potential for patient outcomes.
Economic Implications and Healthcare System Efficiency:
Patient outcomes and the healthcare system’s finances will significantly benefit from decreased colorectal cancer screening rates (Snoswell et al.,2020). The project’s ability to reduce the cost of late-stage cancer therapy and improve resource allocation is highlighted by highlighting its economic advantages. The drive is to work on the maintainability and effectiveness of the medical care framework by advancing brief and reasonable CRC screening administrations.
Advancing Public Health Objectives:
Raising the occurrence of colorectal cancer screening is predictable, with more significant general well-being objectives that help preventive therapy and decrease the complete weight of disease-related dreariness and demise (Santana et al.,2021). By placing the project in the context of public health goals, we emphasize the project’s potential to improve health at the population level. The drive expects to urge individuals to focus on their well-being and embrace proactive screening rehearses through centered intercessions and awareness campaigns.
Project Impact and Equity in Healthcare Access:
Clarifying the project’s importance highlights how revolutionary it may be in achieving public health goals, enhancing patient outcomes, and fostering healthcare fairness (Wallace et al.,2021). The project seeks to establish a more equitable healthcare environment where all persons have equal opportunity to obtain life-saving screening services by addressing inequities in screening access and supporting preventive care activities. The initiative aims to decrease the total burden of CRC on society and promote beneficial health habits via cooperative efforts and community participation.
Chapter Two: Article Summary
According to Goldman.S et al.(2015), Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are disturbingly low, especially in risk groups without screening history. Fecal immunochemical assays (FITs) are promising screening procedures because of their lower barriers. Outreach initiatives have been shown to increase CRC screening rates, although their efficacy in those without prior screening history has yet to be discovered. A patient-level randomized controlled experiment will assess the influence of outreach on FIT adoption in this hard-to-reach group.
The research randomly assigned 420 individuals without CRC screening to outreach programs or standard treatment. The outreach strategy comprised postal FIT kits, reminders, and individualized phone calls. FIT completion within six months was the main consequence. Data analysis examined whether the outreach intervention increased FIT uptake significantly relative to standard treatment.
FIT uptake was much higher in outreach intervention patients than in usual care patients. In particular, 36.7% of outreach patients completed FIT, compared to 14.8% of typical care patients. Clinic visits rose with FIT completion rates. The outreach intervention became less effective with time, although it was still better than standard treatment. This underscores the necessity for continuous and maybe developing measures to preserve and improve CRC screening rates in those without previous screening. Research is needed to find the best and most sustainable ways to improve CRC screening in this susceptible group.
The study carried out by Lee.B et al. (2020) aimed to assess the impact of advanced notification phone calls on the completion rates of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits among patients with a history of negative FIT results . In a safety-net health setting, the randomized controlled trial involved 3,240 participants who had previously undergone FIT screening. These individuals were randomly assigned to receive either an advanced notification call before the FIT kit mailing or no call. The primary outcome measured was the completion of FIT within 60 days following the intervention.
Results revealed that exceptional warning calls prompted a higher pace of FIT completion at the 60-day mark than those who didn’t get a call. At the one-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in completion rates between the two groups, indicating that the calls had no lasting effect. Outstandingly, patients who chatted during the call were bound to finish the FIT than those who got voice messages or were inaccessible. The viability of the high-level warning system might rely upon patient connection during the effort cycle.
The findings emphasize the significance of customizing outreach strategies based on patients’ screening histories to maximize colorectal cancer prevention efforts. While cutting-edge notice calls offer momentary advantages in advancing FIT culmination, they don’t essentially work on long-haul adherence among people with earlier FIT insight. Future exploration could investigate extra mediations or mixes of effort techniques to upgrade supported cooperation in colorectal malignant growth screening programs, eventually adding to a better understanding of results and diminished disease trouble.
Schlichting et al. (2014) work handles the fundamental issue of helping colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, particularly among networks with impediments like separation from medical care offices. Utilizing waste immunochemical tests (FIT) disseminated to average-risk people late for screening, the examination inspected the impact of adding an acquaintance and update calls with the screening program. Before sending out the FIT, the high-intensity intervention (HII) was called to gauge interest and to remind participants if it was not returned. On the other hand, a low-intensity intervention (LII) sent FITs without making contact.
According to the study, FIT results varied significantly between the HII and LII groups. While 85% of FITs shipped off the HII bunch were returned, 92% of qualified responders in the LII gathering did as such, in contrast with 45% in the HII bunch. The expense per FIT returned with HII was $27.43, while with LII it was $44.86. According to research, cost, patient demographics, and availability of screening methods should all be considered when developing CRC screening programs. This is particularly obvious in rustic districts where medical services offices are poor.
The findings demonstrate that both low- and high-intensity therapies can raise CRC screening rates, depending on the choices made by patients and the resources at their disposal. Patients who are not effectively involved may be able to complete the test with no past telephone contact, thanks to the low-power intercession. Despite this, the screening cost could decrease because of the focused energy intercession, guaranteeing that more reasonable examples are returned. These findings should be thoroughly examined by medical professionals, who should then modify CRC screening programs to the preferences and requirements of patients.
The study by Thompson et al. (2019) examined the adequacy of several reminder strategies in increasing the completion rates of mailed faecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach campaigns for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The study included 1,767 patients from two local health centres in its sample size to assess the impacts of different update strategies on screening adherence. The total FIT completion level of 31.3% showed that a sizable sample segment had undergone the screening procedure. This benchmark rate filled in as a norm by which to assess the viability of update programs.
With a reported rate of 32.3%, live phone call updates were viewed as particularly powerful among the strategies for expanding completion rates among those evaluated. A mixed procedure that included live and robotized call updates was considerably more fruitful, bringing about a 35.7% completion rate. Then again, a completion level of just 26.0% was obtained when individuals were reminded via automated calls, showing that human association was critical in empowering individuals to complete CRC screening. The way that instant message prompts didn’t bring about a measurably huge improvement in finishing rates further stresses the mind-boggling job that correspondence systems play in impacting wellbeing conduct.
Different variables were found to affect the completion paces of the members in the exploration. One outstanding finding was distinguishing favoured language as a factor, with Spanish speakers showing more fantastic completion rates. In addition, the number of clinic visits in the previous year and the completion of a FIT before the screening were linked to a higher probability of completing the procedure. These outcomes stressed the worth of altered methodologies in CRC screening effort programs and the need to consider earlier screening practices and segment characteristics while making updated mediations. The examination showed the chance of custom-fitted procedures to develop general wellbeing further. It offered wise data on updating strategies to empower CRC screening adherence.
Sameer Prakash et al. (2022) used telephone or letter reminders to increase FIT return rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The research targeted GET FIT participants in the West Texas Panhandle who received FIT kits following CRC instruction. Over 60 days or five tries, participants who did not return kits within two weeks were reminded. A considerable improvement was shown from October 2019 to March 2020, when the return rate rose to 71.85% from 61.52% in April to September 2019.
Although the research did not accomplish the 25% increase goal, reminder approaches improved FIT return rates. Phone reminders worked well, with over 79% of participants returning kits after the initial contact. Frequent phone calls and letter reminders reduced return rates, showing that periodic reminders may dissuade participation. No gender differences were seen in CRC screening, while Hispanic and African American individuals had higher return rates. Targeted interventions for underprivileged communities to reach screening objectives are crucial.
The findings indicate that CRC screening FIT return rates may rise due to systematic reminders, mainly telephone reminders. Upgrading update procedures by spreading them out and focusing on segment gatherings might increment screening take-up. Underprivileged communities’ screening rates must be addressed to meet screening targets and decrease CRC. Additional research is required to evaluate treatments and reminder strategies in various healthcare settings.
Chapter Three
Introduction to Project Design:
For projects like ours that aim to improve healthcare quality, frameworks like the IOWA Model and Lewin’s Change Theory are necessary. These frameworks provide interim guidance despite the complexity of medical medication. We integrated these models into the plan of our task to utilize their reliable techniques and core values to develop results further.
The IOWA Model and Lewin’s Change Theory show our dedication to demonstrated-based practice and exact arrangement. These structures offer a precise way to deal with critical thinking and change the executives to explore the various difficulties of medical care mediations. We set up our endeavor plan concerning these models to diminish possibilities, expand resources, and lift accomplishment.
Integration of the IOWA Model Framework:
The University of Iowa School of Nursing’s IOWA Model is useful for medical services quality improvement drives (Tucker et al.,2021). It deliberately combines research, clinical data, and patient tendencies to coordinate routes and advance positive change. The IOWA Model helped us make, execute, and evaluate CRC screening drives to increase target people screening rates.
The IOWA Model concerns proof-based work because it recognizes that healthcare treatments should be based on the best available evidence (Doubeni et al.,2021). Our project structure used the research findings to develop effective strategies and treatments that were validated by observational facts. Our meds will undoubtedly win since they were laid out on intelligent principles.
The IOWA Model provides an effective method for managing medical consideration improvement by driving specialists through dire cycles. The model sorts out project stages from unmistakable confirmation and evaluation to intervention execution and appraisal (Doubeni et al.,2021). Medical care organizations can use this precise method to plan, carry out, and survey mediations to achieve their goals because it guarantees consistency, transparency, and accountability.
Our project design process heavily incorporated the IOWA Model for thorough, evidence-based decision-making. We perceived CRC screening gaps, picked giant drugs, gave exploratory data, did them, and surveyed their show using total appraisal techniques by following the model’s orderly strategy. As a result of this integration, which simplified project design and optimized resource allocation, our chances of increasing CRC screening rates increased.
Utilization of Lewin’s Change Theory:
Kurt Lewin’s change Theory reveals insight into hierarchical change and behavior modification. Thawing, modifying, and refreezing are integral to the thought. We are thawing to prepare individuals and associations for change by bringing issues to light and beating resistance. Changing incorporates new propensities or activities, though refreezing builds up and regulates the change for maintainability. In our CRC screening effort, Lewin’s Change Theory helped us comprehend and manage healthcare change.
Lewin’s Change Theory supplements the IOWA Model by giving a mental perspective on medical services mediation execution (Amoako-Attah et al.,2023). Lewin’s Change Theory obstructs inspiration and change status, while the IOWA Model stresses proof-based practice and deliberate preparation. We consolidated proof-based decision production with a change in conduct strategies to amplify the advantages of the two structures in our venture plan.
Our project team utilized Lewin’s Change Theory and the IOWA Model to promote change and eliminate obstacles to CRC screening. Stakeholder participation, support for habit change, and buy-in were all necessary (Amoako-Attah et al.,2023). Perceiving and defeating screening opposition thawed perspectives and works on empowering new screening propensities. To keep up with enhancements, we zeroed in on building and regulating them all through the mediation.
At last, Lewin’s Change Theory and the IOWA Model directed our CRC screening intercessions. We could all the more likely conquer obstructions and energize separating our objective socioeconomics by understanding conduct change elements and defeating opposition at each level. We created proof-based medicines delicate to human factors influencing medical care navigation and conduct utilizing this all-encompassing methodology informed by both hypothetical systems.
Implementation of the IOWA Model Steps:
Our CRC screening interventions were planned, carried out, and evaluated using the IOWA Model framework, which was incorporated into our project design process at multiple levels. Extensive needs evaluations were carried out on discrepancies in CRC screening uptake among our target demographics, and extensive interviews and data analysis revealed screening facilitators and obstacles influencing intervention strategies. The planning phase came up with options for interventions to meet needs and objectives based on the results of the assessments. Pick proof-based intercessions, develop materials and assets, and blueprint execution techniques. We adjusted mediation procedures to the objective populace’s requirements and attributes to improve the achievement and pertinence of our CRC screening exercises.
Conventions executed after arranging mediation measures. To make more people take CRC screenings, outreach, instructional materials, and support services were available. The task group kept up with trustworthiness and transformation all through execution to give intercessions as arranged while adjusting to changing prerequisites and conditions. The final phase of the IOWA Model evaluated the effects and outcomes of the treatments. The uptake of CRC screening, participant satisfaction, and intervention fidelity were examined through questionnaires, interviews, and program monitoring. We learned about accomplishments, hindrances, and unique open doors for development by efficiently investigating results and impacting future CRC screening exercises. Working with the IOWA Model system gives a restrained and proof-based way to deal with project plan and execution, assisting us with expanding CRC screening rates and patient well-being results.
Outcomes and Lessons Learned:
The IOWA Model and Lewin’s Change Theory results showed the viability of an efficient and theory-driven project design methodology. By incorporating these frameworks, we increased CRC screening rates in our target groups, resulting in improved patient outcomes and early detection. Lewin’s Change Theory assisted us with understanding conduct change elements and defeating obstructions to further develop results, while the IOWA Model coordinated the creation and execution of proof-based medicines.
A few undertaking plan illustrations formed our methodology and assisted us with succeeding. Adaptability, collaboration, and correspondence were expected to beat asset limitations, partner contribution, and authoritative purchase (Osborne.,2021). We overcame these obstacles and achieved our objectives by forming partnerships, involving stakeholders, and adapting our strategies in response to data and feedback. We likewise worked on our mediations by ceaseless checking and assessment, showing the requirement for constant learning and variation in medical care quality improvement.
Finally, we could plan successful projects by incorporating frameworks like Lewin’s Change Theory and the IOWA Model. These frameworks increased CRC screening efficacy and sustainability by systematically developing, implementing, and evaluating treatments. Moving forward, we recognize the significance of theory-driven practice in patient care and population health and the necessity of utilizing evidence-based frameworks and methodologies to improve healthcare quality.
References
Amoako-Attah, I., Dunlap, J. J., & Mainous, R. O. (2023). Increasing Patient Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care: An Evidence-Based Improvement Initiative. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 19(8), 80-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2023.104729
Doubeni, C. A., Selby, K., & Gupta, S. (2021). Framework and strategies to eliminate disparities in colorectal cancer screening outcomes. Annual review of medicine, 72, 383-398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-051619-035840
Goldman, S. N., Liss, D. T., Brown, T., Lee, J. Y., Buchanan, D. R., Balsley, K., … & Baker, D. W. (2015). Comparative effectiveness of multifaceted outreach to initiate colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of general internal medicine, 30, 1178-1184. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-015-3234-5
Lee, B., Patel, S., Rachocki, C., Issaka, R., Vittinghoff, E., Shapiro, J. A., … & Somsouk, M. (2020). Advanced Notification Calls Prior to Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test in Previously Screened Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of general internal medicine, 35, 2858-2864. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-020-06009-4
Tucker, S., McNett, M., Mazurek Melnyk, B., Hanrahan, K., Hunter, S. C., Kim, B., … & Kitson, A. (2021). Implementation science: Application of evidence‐based practice models to improve healthcare quality. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 18(2), 76-84.
https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12495
Osborne, K. (2021). A Novel Educational Intervention: Improving Abdominal PressureStrategies during Colonoscopy.Retrieved on 2021-07-23https://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/10342/9286
Petrik, A. F., Green, B., Schneider, J., Miech, E. J., Coury, J., Retecki, S., & Coronado, G. D. (2020). Factors influencing implementation of a colorectal cancer screening improvement program in community health centers: an applied use of configurational comparative methods. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35, 815-822. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-020-06186-2
Prakash, S., Merza, N., Hosseini, O., Ward, H., Mansi, T., Balducci, M., … & Obokhare, I. (2022). Increasing Fecal Immunochemical Test Return Rates by Implementing Effective “Reminder to Complete Kit” Communication With Participants: A Quality Improvement Study. Cureus, 14(5),39,240-326. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.25169
Santana, S., Brach, C., Harris, L., Ochiai, E., Blakey, C., Bevington, F., … & Pronk, N. (2021). Practice full report: Updating health literacy for healthy people 2030: Defining its importance for a new decade in public health. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 27(6),39,188-258.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001324
Schlichting, J. A., Mengeling, M. A., Makki, N. M., Malhotra, A., Halfdanarson, T. R., Klutts, J. S., … & Charlton, M. E. (2014). Increasing colorectal cancer screening in an overdue population: participation and cost impacts of adding telephone calls to a FIT mailing program. Journal of community health, 39, 239-247. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10900-014-9830-1
Snoswell, C. L., Taylor, M. L., Comans, T. A., Smith, A. C., Gray, L. C., & Caffery, L. J. (2020). Determining if telehealth can reduce health system costs: scoping review. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(10), e17298. https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/17298,
Thompson, J. H., Davis, M. M., Michaels, L., Rivelli, J. S., Castillo, M. L., Younger, B. M., … & Coronado, G. D. (2019). Patient-refined Messaging for a mailed colorectal cancer screening program: application of boot camp translation in a Latino-based community health center. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: JABFM, 32(3), 307. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2019.03.180026
Vilaro, M. J., Wilson-Howard, D. S., Zalake, M. S., Tavassoli, F., Lok, B. C., Modave, F. P., … & Krieger, J. L. (2021). Key changes to improve social presence of a virtual health assistant promoting colorectal cancer screening informed by a technology acceptance model. BMC medical informatics and decision making, 21(1), 196. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12911-021-01549-z
Wallace, B., Varcoe, C., Holmes, C., Moosa-Mitha, M., Moor, G., Hudspith, M., & Craig, K. D. (2021). Towards health equity for people experiencing chronic pain and social marginalization. International Journal for Equity in Health, 20(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01394-6
write