Evidence-Based Interventions and Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates: The Colorectal Cancer Screening Program, 2015–2017


      The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention administers the Colorectal Cancer Control Program to increase colorectal cancer screening rates among people aged 50–75 years in areas where rates are lower than state or national levels. The aim of this study is to better understand the effectiveness of specific Colorectal Cancer Control Program components.


      The study population included clinics enrolled in the Colorectal Cancer Control Program during Years 1 and 2. Clinic data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention annually from 2015 to 2017 for program evaluation were used. The outcome variable was screening rate change through Program Year 2, and predictor variables were a new implementation or enhancement of evidence-based interventions and other program components. The analysis, conducted in 2020, used ordinary least square and generalized estimating equations regressions and first difference models to estimate the associations of independent variables with the outcome.


      Of the total 336 clinics, 50%–70% newly implemented or enhanced different evidence-based interventions. Among these, client reminders were most highly associated with the increase in screening rates (8.0 percentage points). Provider reminder was not significantly associated with any change in screening rates. Among all program components, having a colorectal cancer screening champion was most highly (8.4 percentage points) associated with screening rate change. Results from different models were slightly different but in agreement.


      Client reminders, provider assessment and feedback, and colorectal cancer screening champions were associated with increased clinic-level colorectal cancer screening rates. Universal implementation of these strategies can substantially increase colorectal cancer screening rates in the U.S.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Kochanek KD
        • Murphy SL
        • Xu J
        • Arias E.
        Deaths: final data for 2017.
        Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2019; 68: 1-77
        • Bibbins-Domingo K
        • Grossman DC
        • et al.
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
        Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement [published correction appears in JAMA. 2016;316(5):545] [published correction appears in JAMA. 2017;317(21):2239].
        JAMA. 2016; 315: 2564-2575
        • Warren Andersen S
        • Blot WJ
        • Lipworth L
        • Steinwandel M
        • Murff HJ
        • Zheng W
        Association of race and socioeconomic status with colorectal cancer screening, colorectal cancer risk, and mortality in southern U.S. adults.
        JAMA Netw Open. 2019; 2e1917995
        • Joseph DA
        • King JB
        • Dowling NF
        • Thomas CC
        • Richardson LC.
        Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening test use - United States, 2018.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020; 69: 253-259
      1. Colorectal cancer screening rates reach 44.1% in FQHCs in 2018. National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable, American Cancer Society. Updated April 25, 2021. Accessed January 9, 2020.

      2. Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated April 25, 2021. Accessed January 9, 2020.

        • Community Preventive Services Task Force
        Updated recommendations for client- and provider-oriented interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening.
        Am J Prev Med. 2012; 43: 92-96
      3. Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP): spotlight on year 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated 2020. Accessed September 1, 2020.

      4. Use of colorectal cancer screening tests: 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated April 25, 2021. Accessed January 9, 2020.

        • DeGroff A
        • Sharma K
        • Satsangi A
        • et al.
        Increasing colorectal cancer screening in health care systems using evidence-based interventions.
        Prev Chronic Dis. 2018; 15: E100
      5. Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP): publications. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated April 25, 2021. Accessed January 20, 2021.

        • Satsangi A
        • DeGroff A.
        Planning a national-level data collection protocol to measure outcomes for the Colorectal Cancer Control Program.
        J Ga Public Health Assoc. 2016; 6: 292-297
        • Wooldridge JM
        Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data.
        2nd ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA2010
        • Holden DJ
        • Jonas DE
        • Porterfield DS
        • Reuland D
        • Harris RJ.
        Systematic review: enhancing the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening.
        Ann Intern Med. 2010; 152: 668-676
        • Sharma KP
        • DeGroff A
        • Scott L
        • Shrestha S
        • Melillo S
        • Sabatino SA.
        Correlates of colorectal cancer screening rates in primary care clinics serving low income, medically underserved populations.
        Prev Med. 2019; 126105774
        • Dougherty MK
        • Brenner AT
        • Crockett SD
        • et al.
        Evaluation of interventions intended to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        JAMA Intern Med. 2018; 178: 1645-1658
        • Sabatino SA
        • Lawrence B
        • Elder R
        • et al.
        Effectiveness of interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers: nine updated systematic reviews for the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        Am J Prev Med. 2012; 43: 97-118
        • Battat AC
        • Rouse RV
        • Dempsey L
        • Safadi BY
        • Wren SM
        Institutional commitment to rectal cancer screening results in earlier-stage cancers on diagnosis.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2004; 11: 970-976
        • Levy BT
        • Xu Y
        • Daly JM
        • Ely JW.
        A randomized controlled trial to improve colon cancer screening in rural family medicine: an Iowa Research Network (IRENE) study.
        J Am Board Fam Med. 2013; 26: 486-497
        • Sequist TD
        • Zaslavsky AM
        • Marshall R
        • Fletcher RH
        • Ayanian JZ
        Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.
        Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169: 364-371
        • Carroll C
        • Patterson M
        • Wood S
        • Booth A
        • Rick J
        • Balain S
        A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity.
        Implement Sci. 2007; 2: 40
        • Durlak J
        The importance of quality implementation for research, practice and policy.
        Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, HHS, Washington, DCFebruary 1, 2013 ( Published. Accessed March 16, 2021)
        • Miech EJ
        • Rattray NA
        • Flanagan ME
        • Damschroder L
        • Schmid AA
        • Damush TM
        Inside help: an integrative review of champions in healthcare-related implementation.
        SAGE Open Med. 2018; 62050312118773261
        • Shaw EK
        • Howard J
        • West DR
        • et al.
        The role of the champion in primary care change efforts: from the State Networks of Colorado Ambulatory Practices and Partners (SNOCAP).
        J Am Board Fam Med. 2012; 25: 676-685
        • Powell BJ
        • Waltz TJ
        • Chinman MJ
        • et al.
        A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project.
        Implement Sci. 2015; 10: 21