ArticleBMC health services research2019
Assessing the implementation of a patient navigation intervention for colonoscopy screening.
Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing a successful patient navigation program for follow-up colonoscopy: Lessons from the PRECISE study.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Patient navigator team perceptions on the implementation of a citywide breast cancer patient navigation protocol: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2022Trial
- Precision Patient Navigation to Improve Rates of Follow-up Colonoscopy, An Individual Randomized Effectiveness Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Trial
- What makes patient navigation work? Identifying functions and forms and conducting causal loop diagramming to specify components of a successful colorectal cancer patient navigation program.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Evaluation of physical activity intervention studies among children and adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa using the RE-AIM framework: a scoping review.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Characterizing screening champions in the center for disease control and prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP).Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Evaluating implementation of a community-focused patient navigation intervention at an NCI-designated cancer center using RE-AIM.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Methods for scaling up an outreach intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in rural areas.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Reach and effectiveness of a centralized navigation program for patients with positive fecal immunochemical tests requiring follow-up colonoscopy.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
- Using Veterans Socials to Build a Community: Feasibility of the VOICES Intervention.Community mental health journal · 2022Article
- Pairing Project ECHO and patient navigation as an innovative approach to improving the health and wellness of cancer survivors in rural settings.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022Article
- Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015-2018.Preventing chronic disease · 2022Article
- Bridging the Gap: Patient Navigation Increases Colonoscopy Follow-up After Abnormal FIT.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- Evidenced-Based Screening Strategies for a Positive Family History.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA recent study demonstrated the effectiveness of the New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program's (NHCRCSP) patient navigation (PN) program. The PN intervention was delivered by telephone with navigators following a rigorous, six-topic protocol to support low-income patients to complete colonoscopy screening. We applied the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework to examine implementation processes and consider potential scalability of this intervention.
methodsA mixed-methods evaluation study was conducted including 1) a quasi-experimental, retrospective, comparison group study examining program effectiveness, 2) secondary analysis of NHCRCSP program data, and 3) a case study. Data for all navigated patients scheduled and notified of their colonoscopy test date between July 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 (N = 443) were analyzed. Researchers were provided in-depth call details for 50 patients randomly selected from the group of 443. The case study included review of program documents, observations of navigators, and interviews with 27 individuals including staff, patients, and other stakeholders.
resultsProgram reach was state-wide, with navigators serving patients from across the state. The program successfully recruited patients from the intended priority population who met the established age, income, and insurance eligibility guidelines. Analysis of the 443 NHCRCSP patients navigated during the study period demonstrated effectiveness with 97.3% completing colonoscopy, zero missed appointments (no-shows), and 0.7% late cancellations. Trained and supervised nurse navigators spent an average of 124.3 min delivering the six-topic PN protocol to patients. Navigators benefited from a real-time data system that allowed for patient tracking, communication across team members, and documentation of service delivery. Evaluators identified several factors supporting program maintenance including consistent funding support from CDC, a strong program infrastructure, and partnerships.
conclusionsFactors supporting implementation included funding for colonoscopies, use of registered nurses, a clinical champion, strong partnerships with primary care and endoscopy sites, fidelity to the PN protocol, significant intervention dose, and a real-time data system. Further study is needed to assess scalability to other locations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.