Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 144–150 | Cite as

Effect of Patient Navigation on Time to Diagnostic Resolution among Patients with Colorectal Cancer-Related Abnormalities

  • Ji-Hyun Lee
  • William Fulp
  • Kristen J. Wells
  • Cathy D. Meade
  • Ercilia Calcano
  • Richard RoetzheimEmail author


The objective of this study is to evaluate whether a patient navigation (PN) program is effective in reducing delay in diagnostic resolution among medically underserved patients with colorectal cancer (CRC)-related abnormalities in Tampa Bay, Florida. This study involved ten primary care clinics randomized either to receive navigation or to serve as controls (five clinics per arm). Each clinic identified all subjects with CRC-related abnormalities in the year prior to the clinic beginning participation in the Moffitt Patient Navigator Research Program. Patients with CRC-related abnormalities were navigated from the time of a colorectal abnormality to diagnostic resolution. Control patients received usual care, and outcome information was obtained from medical record abstraction. Using a frailty Cox proportional hazard model, we examined the length of time between colorectal abnormality and definitive diagnosis. One hundred ninety-three patients were eligible for the study because of a CRC-related abnormality (75 navigated and 118 controls). Analysis of PN effect by two time periods of resolution (0–4 and >4 months) showed a lagged effect of PN. The adjusted time-varying PN effect on diagnostic resolution compared to the controls was marginally significant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.15, 95 % confidence interval = 1.02–1.29) after controlling for insurance status. The predicted aHR at 4 months was 1.2, but showed no significant effect until 12 months. For patients having an abnormal symptom of CRC, PN appeared to have a positive effect over time and sped diagnostic resolution after 4 months. However, the small sample size limits drawing a definitive conclusion regarding the positive PN effect.


Patient navigation Colorectal cancer Time to diagnostic resolution Cluster randomized trial 



The authors would like to thank the health care organizations, staff, navigators, and patients who contributed to the study and the study Community Advisory Board. This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), through its Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services (U01 CA 117281-01). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NCI. Dr. Wells' contribution to this study was also funded by a grant from NCI (R25 CA090314; Paul B. Jacobsen, Ph.D., Principal Investigator). Dr. Meade was also supported by NCI (U01 CA114627 and U54 CA153509).


  1. 1.
    Tørring ML et al (2011) Time to diagnosis and mortality in colorectal cancer: a cohort study in primary care. Br J Cancer 104(6):934–940PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkin WS et al (2010) Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 375(9726):1624–1633CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hewitson P et al (2007) Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (1):CD001216. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001216.pub2
  4. 4.
    Freeman HP (2012) The origin, evolution, and principles of patient navigation. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(10):1614–1617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wells KJ et al (2008) Patient navigation: state of the art or is it science? Cancer 113(8):1999–2010PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ward E et al (2008) Association of insurance with cancer care utilization and outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 58(1):9–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Percac-Lima S et al (2009) A culturally tailored navigator program for colorectal cancer screening in a community health center: a randomized, controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 24(2):211–217PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lasser KE et al (2011) Colorectal cancer screening among ethnically diverse, low-income patients: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 171(10):906CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lebwohl B et al (2011) Effect of a patient navigator program on the volume and quality of colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol 45(5):e47PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Christie J et al (2008) A randomized controlled trial using patient navigation to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income minorities. J Natl Med Assoc 100(3):278–284PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen LA et al (2008) A program to enhance completion of screening colonoscopy among urban minorities. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 6(4):443–450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Myers RE et al (2008) Tailored navigation in colorectal cancer screening. Med Care 46(9):S123–S131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nash D et al (2006) Evaluation of an intervention to increase screening colonoscopy in an urban public hospital setting. J Urban Health 83(2):231–243PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paskett ED et al (2012) The Ohio Patient Navigation Research Program: does the American cancer society patient navigation model improve time to resolution in patients with abnormal screening tests? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(10):1620–1628PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wells KJ et al (2012) A cluster randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation in improving quality of diagnostic care for patients with breast or colorectal cancer abnormalities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(10):1664–1672PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Raich PC et al (2012) Patient navigation improves cancer diagnostic resolution: an individually randomized clinical trial in an underserved population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(10):1629–1638PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee JH, Fulp W, Wells K, Meade CD, Calcano C, Roetzheim R (2013) Patient navigation and time to diagnostic resolution: results for a cluster randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation among patients with breast cancer screening abnormalities, Tampa, FL. PLoS One 8(9):e74542Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Level PBP (2005–2006) US Census Bureau: State and County QuickFacts: Florida. Data updated July 2007Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wells KJ et al (2011) Innovative approaches to reducing cancer health disparities. J Cancer Educ 26(4):649–657PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Calhoun EA et al (2010) A national patient navigator training program. Health Promot Pract 11(2):205–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lin DY, Wei LJ, Ying Z (1993) Checking the Cox model with cumulative sums of martingale-based residuals. Biometrika 80(3):557–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Naylor K, Ward J, Polite BN (2012) Interventions to improve care related to colorectal cancer among racial and ethnic minorities: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 27(8):1033–1046PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dietrich AJ et al (2006) Telephone care management to improve cancer screening among low-income women. Ann Intern Med 144(8):563–571PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tu SP et al (2006) Promoting culturally appropriate colorectal cancer screening through a health educator. Cancer 107(5):959–966CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Warren-Mears V et al (2013) Impact of patient navigation on cancer diagnostic resolution among Northwest Tribal communities. J Cancer Educ 28(1):109–118PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Battaglia TA et al (2012) Boston patient navigation research program: the impact of navigation on time to diagnostic resolution after abnormal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(10):1645–1654PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jandorf L et al (2013) Cost analysis of a patient navigation system to increase screening colonoscopy adherence among urban minorities. Cancer 119(3):612–620PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Elkin EB et al (2012) The economic impact of a patient navigator program to increase screening colonoscopy. Cancer 118:5982–5988CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ji-Hyun Lee
    • 1
  • William Fulp
    • 1
  • Kristen J. Wells
    • 3
  • Cathy D. Meade
    • 1
  • Ercilia Calcano
    • 4
  • Richard Roetzheim
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research InstituteTampaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Family Medicine, College of MedicineUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  3. 3.Moore’s Cancer CenterSan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.College of Behavioral and Community SciencesUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations