Abstract CN03-04: Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention
Authors: Battaglia Tracy A. , Kronman Andrea , Beaver Kristine , Freund Karen M. 
Published: January 2011

Abstract
Background: Delays and/or lack of follow up after an abnormal breast cancer screening test among minority and low-income women contribute to increased morbidity and mortality from breast cancer.
Objective: To evaluate the effect of a patient navigation intervention on adherence rates to timely diagnostic follow up among women seeking care at an inner city academic medical center; and to develop ongoing quality improvement metrics to monitor its success longitudinally and determine best practices.
Design: Quality improvement intervention with an historical control group. Timely follow-up was defined as arrival to diagnostic evaluation within 120 days from the first scheduled diagnostic appointment date. Data were collected via computerized registration, medical records, and patient interview. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted, comparing preintervention and intervention groups, with propensity score analysis and time trend analysis to address the limitations of the pre-post design. The following continuous quality improvement metrics were created to monitor success of the program longitudinally: secular trend of Navigator Contact Level, secular trend of Appointment Completion Rate by Navigator Contact Level, and logistic regression to evaluate odds of completing appointment within months by Navigator Contact Level.
Study Subjects: All women referred to a diagnostic breast health practice at an inner city academic safety-net institution from January to June 2000 (preintervention), November 2001 to February 2003 (intervention), and from January 2007 to June 2009 (intervention).
Intervention: Patient navigators are trained to identify individual patient barriers to accessing care and working with the team of providers to overcome those barriers by linking patients to available resources. Two fulltime navigators are integrated into the diagnostic provider team and interacted directly with patients, providers, and radiology to coordinate and ensure timely follow up to recommended care. Navigators interact with patients through a combination of telephone calls, in-person visits and reminder letters. Navigators adhere to protocols for outreach and utilize an electronic report to track subjects.
Key Results: 314 patients were scheduled preintervention and 1,018 during the initial intervention period. Overall, mean age was 44 years; 40% were black, 36% non-Hispanic white, 14% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 5% other; 15% required an interpreter; 68% had no or only public insurance. Forty-four percent of referrals originated from a community health center, 34% from a hospital-based practice. During the intervention, 78% had timely follow-up versus 64% preintervention (P &lt; .0001). In adjusted analyses, women in the intervention group had 39% greater odds of having timely follow-up (95% CI, 1.01-1.9). Timely follow-up in the adjusted model was associated with older age (P = .0003), having private insurance (P = .006), having an abnormal mammogram (P = .0001), and being referred from a hospital-based practice (compared to a community health center) (P = .003). Among 2,020 patients scheduled in the longitudinal intervention group, secular trends in the ability of navigators to directly contact patients via telephone outreach were found. Direct telephone contact between navigator and patient results in more women completing their first appointment, and doing so in a shorter timeframe
Conclusions: Our data document the benefit of patient navigators in reducing delays in breast cancer care for poor and minority populations and suggest best practices for monitoring program success longitudinally. Developing and utilizing measures of navigator effectiveness can improve quality of care.
Citation Information: Cancer Prev Res 2010;3(12 Suppl):CN03-04.