Survey of ColoRectal Cancer Education and Environment Needs
NCT ID: NCT00229554
Last Updated: 2015-04-07
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
4644 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2006-03-31
2008-03-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Promoting Veteran-Centered Colorectal Cancer Screening
NCT02027545
Evaluating Strategies to Present Colon Cancer Screening Information
NCT02485561
Optimizing Navigation to Successful Colorectal Cancer Screening
NCT02192034
CRC Screening in Unscreened Individuals 45-54
NCT06757192
Cancer Screening; Access; Awareness; Navigation
NCT04131946
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Despite strong evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a variety of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods for reducing CRC mortality, current CRC screening rates fall far below the levels needed to significantly impact CRC mortality. Unfortunately, however, the existing literature on patient CRC screening behavior does not yet provide a sufficient evidence base for making sound recommendations regarding how to most effectively improve upon these rates in the VA. This study will inform future CRC screening promotion efforts and make important scientific contributions to existing literature by: (a) delineating the relative contribution of patient cognitive, environmental and background factors to CRC screening behavior using a multi-level, theory driven analysis approach on a nationally representative sample, and (b) identifying the determinants of variation in CRC screening behavior across vulnerable population subgroups.
Objective(s):
The overall goal of this study was to address significant gaps in the existing evidence base in order to inform the development of effective patient-directed interventions to increase CRC screening among veterans age 50 and older. This was accomplished by using data collected from a mailed patient survey and theory-based analysis approaches to uncover key barriers to screening adherence and to identify fruitful intervention approaches for modifying them. The specific primary objectives of this study were to: (1) Estimate the relative effect of patient cognitive (knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy), environmental (social network and medical care characteristics), and background (demographics, health status, prior screening experiences) factors on CRC screening behavior; (2) Identify factors that contribute to any disparities in CRC screening behavior by race/ethnicity or other patient characteristics; (3) Identify from these analyses: (a) priority population subgroups to target in future interventions (i.e., those at the greatest risk of failing to be screened), and (b) priority factors to target in future interventions (i.e., those that are not only strongly associated with CRC screening but also prevalent in the target population and amenable to intervention, as well as those that are most likely to ameliorate race and other disparities). Secondary objectives included: (1) assessing patient values and preferences regarding the various CRC screening modality options, (2) estimating stage of readiness to adopt CRC screening in the study population, and (3) validating measures of CRC knowledge and self-reported screening behavior.
Methods:
This is an observational study based on a nationally representative, cross-sectional mailed survey of 3,744 male and female veterans age 50-75 who have had one or more primary care visits at a VA Medical facility in the past two years. The survey sample was drawn using a two stage procedure where we first randomly select 24 VA facilities stratified by size and racial mix and then select a simple random sample of 156 eligible veterans from each sampled facility. Prior to the national survey, a pilot survey was conducted with the purpose of refining both the study instruments and the study protocol. The sample consisted of 900 randomly selected veterans from the Minneapolis VA Medical Center meeting the same sampling eligibility criteria used for the national mailed survey. The mailed patient questionnaire, made up primarily of previously validated measures, included measures of self-reported CRC screening behavior; patient demographic, health, social network and medical care characteristics; CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, social norms and self-efficacy; and attitudes toward medical care. Additional measures of organizational-level CRC screening practices from a recently completed VA facility survey were linked to the patient survey.The primary outcome is whether the patient is currently compliant with CRC screening guidelines (i.e., received either a fecal occult blood test in the past year, a sigmoidoscopy or double contrast barium enema in the past five years, or a colonoscopy in the past ten years). The primary analyses tested (using logistic regression and a multi-level, structural equation modeling approach) specific hypotheses about the association between this measure and patient background, cognitive and environmental factors and their interactions. Additional analyses conducted include a multinomial logistic regression to assess patient screening mode preferences and their determinants, and logistic and multinomial logistics regression analyses with interactions to determine whether and why any observed patterns in CRC screening behavior vary by race.
Status:
Completed
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group 1
Male and female veterans age 50-75 who have had one or more primary care visits at a VA Medical facility in the past two years.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
50 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
US Department of Veterans Affairs
FED
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Melissa R. Partin, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Partin MR, Grill J, Noorbaloochi S, Powell AA, Burgess DJ, Vernon SW, Halek K, Griffin JM, van Ryn M, Fisher DA. Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behavior from a mixed-mode survey of veterans. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Apr;17(4):768-76. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0759. Epub 2008 Apr 1.
Burgess DJ, Powell AA, Griffin JM, Partin MR. Race and the validity of self-reported cancer screening behaviors: development of a conceptual model. Prev Med. 2009 Feb;48(2):99-107. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.11.014. Epub 2008 Dec 11.
Partin MR, Burgess DJ, Halek K, Grill J, Vernon SW, Fisher DA, Griffin JM, Murdoch M. Randomized trial showed requesting medical records with a survey produced a more representative sample than requesting separately. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Oct;61(10):1028-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.015. Epub 2008 Jun 11.
Friedemann-Sanchez G, Griffin JM, Partin MR. Gender differences in colorectal cancer screening barriers and information needs. Health Expect. 2007 Jun;10(2):148-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00430.x.
Burgess DJ, van Ryn M, Grill J, Noorbaloochi S, Griffin JM, Ricards J, Vernon SW, Fisher DA, Partin MR. Presence and correlates of racial disparities in adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Mar;26(3):251-8. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1575-7. Epub 2010 Nov 18.
Kodl MM, Powell AA, Noorbaloochi S, Grill JP, Bangerter AK, Partin MR. Mental health, frequency of healthcare visits, and colorectal cancer screening. Med Care. 2010 Oct;48(10):934-9. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e57901.
Partin MR, Noorbaloochi S, Grill J, Burgess DJ, van Ryn M, Fisher DA, Griffin JM, Powell AA, Halek K, Bangerter A, Vernon SW. The interrelationships between and contributions of background, cognitive, and environmental factors to colorectal cancer screening adherence. Cancer Causes Control. 2010 Sep;21(9):1357-68. doi: 10.1007/s10552-010-9563-0. Epub 2010 Apr 24.
Burgess DJ, Grill J, Noorbaloochi S, Griffin JM, Ricards J, van Ryn M, Partin MR. The effect of perceived racial discrimination on bodily pain among older African American men. Pain Med. 2009 Nov;10(8):1341-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2009.00742.x.
Powell AA, Burgess DJ, Vernon SW, Griffin JM, Grill JP, Noorbaloochi S, Partin MR. Colorectal cancer screening mode preferences among US veterans. Prev Med. 2009 Nov;49(5):442-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.09.002. Epub 2009 Sep 8.
Griffin JM, Burgess D, Vernon SW, Friedemann-Sanchez G, Powell A, van Ryn M, Halek K, Noorbaloochi S, Grill J, Bloomfield H, Partin M. Are gender differences in colorectal cancer screening rates due to differences in self-reporting? Prev Med. 2009 Nov;49(5):436-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.09.013. Epub 2009 Sep 16.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IIR 04-042
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.