Original Research
5 March 2013

An Automated Intervention With Stepped Increases in Support to Increase Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Trial

Publication: Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 158, Number 5_Part_1

Abstract

Background:

Screening decreases colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, yet almost half of age-eligible patients are not screened at recommended intervals.

Objective:

To determine whether interventions using electronic health records (EHRs), automated mailings, and stepped increases in support improve CRC screening adherence over 2 years.

Design:

4-group, parallel-design, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessments. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00697047)

Setting:

21 primary care medical centers.

Patients:

4675 adults aged 50 to 73 years not current for CRC screening.

Intervention:

Usual care, EHR-linked mailings (“automated”), automated plus telephone assistance (“assisted”), or automated and assisted plus nurse navigation to testing completion or refusal (“navigated”). Interventions were repeated in year 2.

Measurements:

The proportion of participants current for screening in both years, defined as colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy (year 1) or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in year 1 and FOBT, colonoscopy, or sigmoidoscopy (year 2).

Results:

Compared with those in the usual care group, participants in the intervention groups were more likely to be current for CRC screening for both years with significant increases by intensity (usual care, 26.3% [95% CI, 23.4% to 29.2%]; automated, 50.8% [CI, 47.3% to 54.4%]; assisted, 57.5% [CI, 54.5% to 60.6%]; and navigated, 64.7% [CI, 62.5% to 67.0%]; P < 0.001 for all pair-wise comparisons). Increases in screening were primarily due to increased uptake of FOBT being completed in both years (usual care, 3.9% [CI, 2.8% to 5.1%]; automated, 27.5% [CI, 24.9% to 30.0%]; assisted, 30.5% [CI, 27.9% to 33.2%]; and navigated, 35.8% [CI, 33.1% to 38.6%]).

Limitation:

Participants were required to provide verbal consent and were more likely to be white and to participate in other types of cancer screening, limiting generalizability.

Conclusion:

Compared with usual care, a centralized, EHR-linked, mailed CRC screening program led to twice as many persons being current for screening over 2 years. Assisted and navigated interventions led to smaller but significant stepped increases compared with the automated intervention only. The rapid growth of EHRs provides opportunities for spreading this model broadly.

Primary Funding Source:

National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

1.
Siegel RNaishadham DJemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:10-29. [PMID: 22237781]
2.
Vogelaar Ivan Ballegooijen MSchrag DBoer RWinawer SJHabbema JDet al. How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the U.S.? Mortality projections for scenarios of risk-factor modification, screening, and treatment. Cancer. 2006;107:1624-33. [PMID: 16933324]
3.
Joseph DAKing JBMiller JWRichardson LCCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among adults—Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61 Suppl 51-6. [PMID: 22695464]
4.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627-37. [PMID: 18838716]
5.
Whitlock EPLin JSLiles EBeil TLFu R. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:638-58. [PMID: 18838718]
6.
Zauber AGLansdorp-Vogelaar IKnudsen ABWilschut Jvan Ballegooijen MKuntz KM. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:659-69. [PMID: 18838717]
7.
Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Recommendations for client- and provider-directed interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:S21-5. [PMID: 18541184]
8.
Baron RCRimer BKBreslow RACoates RJKerner JMelillo Set alTask Force on Community Preventive Services. Client-directed interventions to increase community demand for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:S34-55. [PMID: 18541187]
9.
Sabatino SALawrence BElder RMercer SLWilson KMDeVinney Bet alCommunity Preventive Services Task Force. 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. [PMID: 22704754]
10.
Green BBWang CYHorner KCatz SMeenan RTVernon SWet al. Systems of support to increase colorectal cancer screening and follow-up rates (SOS): design, challenges, and baseline characteristics of trial participants. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31:589-603. [PMID: 20674774]
11.
Green BBBogart AChubak JVernon SWMorales LSMeenan RTet al. Nonparticipation in a population-based trial to increase colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42:390-7. [PMID: 22424252]
12.
Hsu CColeman KRoss TRJohnson EFishman PALarson EBet al. Spreading a patient-centered medical home redesign: a case study. J Ambul Care Manage. 2012;35:99-108. [PMID: 22415283]
13.
Luce BManning WSiegel JLipscomb J. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford Univ Pr; 1996:176-213.
14.
Dunn OJ. Multiple Comparisons among Means. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1961;56:52-64.
15.
Hawley STMcQueen ABartholomew LKGreisinger AJCoan SPMyers Ret al. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests and screening test use in a large multispecialty primary care practice. Cancer. 2012;118:2726-34. [PMID: 21948225]
16.
Inadomi JMVijan SJanz NKFagerlin AThomas JPLin YVet al. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening: a randomized clinical trial of competing strategies. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:575-82. [PMID: 22493463]
17.
Church TRYeazel MWJones RMKochevar LKWatt GDMongin SJet al. A randomized trial of direct mailing of fecal occult blood tests to increase colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:770-80. [PMID: 15150305]
18.
Hoffman RMSteel SRYee EFMassie LSchrader RMMoffett MLet al. A system-based intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake. Am J Manag Care. 2011;17:49-55. [PMID: 21348568]
19.
Coronado GDGolovaty ILongton GLevy LJimenez R. Effectiveness of a clinic-based colorectal cancer screening promotion program for underserved Hispanics. Cancer. 2011;117:1745-54. [PMID: 21472722]
20.
Freedman JDMitchell CK. A simple strategy to improve patient adherence to outpatient fecal occult blood testing. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9:462-4. [PMID: 7965243]
21.
Miller MFWong JG. Reducing financial barriers enhances the return rate of stool Hemoccult packets. Am J Med Sci. 1993;306:98-100. [PMID: 8362899]
22.
van Roon AHHol LWilschut JAReijerink JCvan Vuuren AJvan Ballegooijen Met al. Advance notification letters increase adherence in colorectal cancer screening: a population-based randomized trial. Prev Med. 2011;52:448-51. [PMID: 21457725]
23.
Cole SRSmith AWilson CTurnbull DEsterman AYoung GP. An advance notification letter increases participation in colorectal cancer screening. J Med Screen. 2007;14:73-5. [PMID: 17626705]
24.
Lee JKReis VLiu SConn LGroessl EJGaniats TGet al. Improving fecal occult blood testing compliance using a mailed educational reminder. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24:1192-7. [PMID: 19774423]
25.
Thompson NJBoyko EJDominitz JABelcher DWChesebro BBStephens LMet al. A randomized controlled trial of a clinic-based support staff intervention to increase the rate of fecal occult blood test ordering. Prev Med. 2000;30:244-51. [PMID: 10684748]
26.
Potter MBWalsh JMYu TMGildengorin GGreen LWMcPhee SJ. The effectiveness of the FLU-FOBT program in primary care a randomized trial. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41:9-16. [PMID: 21665058]
27.
Mosen DMFeldstein ACPerrin NRosales AGSmith DHLiles EGet al. Automated telephone calls improved completion of fecal occult blood testing. Med Care. 2010;48:604-10. [PMID: 20508529]
28.
Simon SRZhang FSoumerai SBEnsroth ABernstein LFletcher RHet al. Failure of automated telephone outreach with speech recognition to improve colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:264-70. [PMID: 20142572]
29.
Levy BTDaly JMXu YEly JW. Mailed fecal immunochemical tests plus educational materials to improve colon cancer screening rates in Iowa Research Network (IRENE) practices. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25:73-82. [PMID: 22218627]
30.
Sequist TDZaslavsky AMMarshall RFletcher RHAyanian JZ. Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:364-71. [PMID: 19237720]
31.
Khankari KEder MOsborn CYMakoul GClayman MSkripkauskas Set al. Improving colorectal cancer screening among the medically underserved: a pilot study within a federally qualified health center. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1410-4. [PMID: 17653808]
32.
Ornstein SNemeth LSJenkins RGNietert PJ. Colorectal cancer screening in primary care: translating research into practice. Med Care. 2010;48:900-6. [PMID: 20808257]
33.
Ferreira MRDolan NCFitzgibbon MLDavis TCGorby NLadewski Let al. Health care provider-directed intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among veterans: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:1548-54. [PMID: 15735130]
34.
Ganz PAFarmer MMBelman MJGarcia CAStreja LDietrich AJet al. Results of a randomized controlled trial to increase colorectal cancer screening in a managed care health plan. Cancer. 2005;104:2072-83. [PMID: 16216030]
35.
Lane DSMessina CRCavanagh MFChen JJ. A provider intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening in county health centers. Med Care. 2008;46:S109-16. [PMID: 18725822]
36.
Ling BSSchoen RETrauth JMWahed ASEury TSimak DMet al. Physicians encouraging colorectal screening: a randomized controlled trial of enhanced office and patient management on compliance with colorectal cancer screening. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:47-55. [PMID: 19139323]
37.
Roetzheim RGChristman LKJacobsen PBSchroeder JAbdulla RHunter S. Long-term results from a randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3:109-14. [PMID: 15798035]
38.
Baker ANParsons MDonnelly SMJohnson LDay JMervis Aet al. Improving colon cancer screening rates in primary care: a pilot study emphasising the role of the medical assistant. Qual Saf Health Care. 2009;18:355-9. [PMID: 19812097]
39.
Wei EKRyan CTDietrich AJColditz GA. Improving colorectal cancer screening by targeting office systems in primary care practices: disseminating research results into clinical practice. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:661-6. [PMID: 15795343]
40.
Miller DP JrSpangler JGCase LDGoff DC JrSingh SPignone MP. Effectiveness of a web-based colorectal cancer screening patient decision aid: a randomized controlled trial in a mixed-literacy population. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40:608-15. [PMID: 21565651]
41.
Pignone MWinquist ASchild LALewis CScott THawley Jet al. Effectiveness of a patient and practice-level colorectal cancer screening intervention in health plan members: the CHOICE trial. Cancer. 2011;117:3352-62. [PMID: 21319147]
42.
Pignone MHarris RKinsinger L. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:761-9. [PMID: 11085838]
43.
Ruffin MT 4thFetters MDJimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2007;45:267-73. [PMID: 17689600]
44.
Smith SKTrevena LSimpson JMBarratt ANutbeam DMcCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010;341:c5370. [PMID: 20978060]
45.
Vernon SWBartholomew LKMcQueen ABettencourt JLGreisinger ACoan SPet al. A randomized controlled trial of a tailored interactive computer-delivered intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening: sometimes more is just the same. Ann Behav Med. 2011;41:284-99. [PMID: 21271365]
46.
Lairson DRDiCarlo MMyers REWolf TCocroft JSifri Ret al. Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use. Cancer. 2008;112:779-88. [PMID: 18098272]
47.
Misra SLairson DRChan WChang YCBartholomew LKGreisinger Aet al. Cost effectiveness of interventions to promote screening for colorectal cancer: a randomized trial. J Prev Med Public Health. 2011;44:101-10. [PMID: 21617335]
48.
Shankaran VLuu THNonzee NRichey EMcKoy JMGraff Zivin Jet al. Costs and cost effectiveness of a health care provider-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5370-5. [PMID: 19826133]
49.
Wolf MSFitzner KAPowell EFMcCaffrey KRPickard ASMcKoy JMet al. Costs and cost effectiveness of a health care provider-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among Veterans. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8877-83. [PMID: 16314648]
50.
Tu SPTaylor VYasui YChun AYip MPAcorda Eet al. Promoting culturally appropriate colorectal cancer screening through a health educator: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer. 2006;107:959-66. [PMID: 16865681]
51.
Aragones ASchwartz MDShah NRGany FM. A randomized controlled trial of a multilevel intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among Latino immigrants in a primary care facility. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25:564-7. [PMID: 20213208]
52.
Katz MLFisher JLFleming KPaskett ED. Patient activation increases colorectal cancer screening rates: a randomized trial among low-income minority patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21:45-52. [PMID: 22068288]
53.
Basch CEWolf RLBrouse CHShmukler CNeugut ADeCarlo LTet al. Telephone outreach to increase colorectal cancer screening in an urban minority population. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:2246-53. [PMID: 17077394]
54.
Dietrich AJTobin JNCassells ARobinson CMGreene MASox CHet al. Telephone care management to improve cancer screening among low-income women: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144:563-71. [PMID: 16618953]
55.
Fiscella KHumiston SHendren SWinters PIdris ALi SXet al. A multimodal intervention to promote mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a safety-net practice. J Natl Med Assoc. 2011;103:762-8. [PMID: 22046855]
56.
Lasser KEMurillo JMedlin ELisboa SValley-Shah LFletcher RHet al. A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2009;10:37. [PMID: 19480698]
57.
Percac-Lima SGrant RWGreen ARAshburner JMGamba GOo Set al. A culturally tailored navigator program for colorectal cancer screening in a community health center: a randomized, controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24:211-7. [PMID: 19067085]
58.
Walsh JMSalazar RNguyen TTKaplan CNguyen LKHwang Jet al. Healthy colon, healthy life: a novel colorectal cancer screening intervention. Am J Prev Med. 2010;39:1-14. [PMID: 20547275]
59.
Chao HHSchwartz ARHersh JHunnibell LJackson GLProvenzale DTet al. Improving colorectal cancer screening and care in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare system. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2009;8:22-8. [PMID: 19203893]
60.
Malila NPalva TMalminiemi OPaimela HAnttila AHakulinen Tet al. Coverage and performance of colorectal cancer screening with the faecal occult blood test in Finland. J Med Screen. 2011;18:18-23. [PMID: 21536812]
61.
Zavoral MSuchanek SZavada FDusek LMuzik JSeifert Bet al. Colorectal cancer screening in Europe [Editorial]. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:5907-15. [PMID: 20014454]
62.
Levin TRJamieson LBurley DAReyes JOehrli MCaldwell C. Organized colorectal cancer screening in integrated health care systems. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33:101-10. [PMID: 21709143]
63.
Vart GBanzi RMinozzi S. Comparing participation rates between immunochemical and guaiac faecal occult blood tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2012;55:87-92. [PMID: 22634386]
64.
Rabeneck LRumble RBThompson FMills MOleschuk CWhibley Aet al. Fecal immunochemical tests compared with guaiac fecal occult blood tests for population-based colorectal cancer screening. Can J Gastroenterol. 2012;26:131-47. [PMID: 22408764]
65.
Sequist TDFranz CAyanian JZ. Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening. Med Care. 2010;48:553-7. [PMID: 20473196]

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image Annals of Internal Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 158Number 5_Part_15 March 2013
Pages: 301 - 311

History

Published online: 5 March 2013
Published in issue: 5 March 2013

Keywords

Authors

Affiliations

Beverly B. Green, MD, MPH
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Ching-Yun Wang, PhD
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Melissa L. Anderson, MS
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Jessica Chubak, PhD, MBHL
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Richard T. Meenan, PhD
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Sally W. Vernon, PhD
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Sharon Fuller, BA
From the Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Physicians, University of Washington School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon; and University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
Disclaimer: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Acknowledgment: The authors thank Robert S. Thompson, MD, Group Health Physicians, Group Health Permanente, study design; Kim Riddell, MD, Group Health Permanente, laboratory support; Peggy Rogers, Group Health Cooperative, laboratory support; David Carrell, PhD, Group Health Research Institute, programmer; Kathryn Horner, MS, San Francisco General Hospital; Ed Wagner, MD, MPH, Group Health Research Institute, McColl Center, conceptual model, advisor; Stephen Taplin, MD, MPH, National Cancer Institute, study design; Jackie St. John, BS, Group Health Research Institute, project manager; Andy Bogart, MS, Group Health Research Institute, biostatistician; Mary Lyons, BFA, Group Health Research Institute, research specialist; Kris Hansen, BA, Group Health Research Institute, research specialist; Chris Tachibana, PhD, Group Health Research Institute, scientific editor; Camille Campbell, BA, Group Health Research Institute, administrative support; and Annie Shaffer, BA, Group Health Research Institute, administrative support.
Grant Support: By grant R01CA121125 from the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.
Reproducible Research Statement: Study protocol: Available from reference 10 or from Dr. Green (e-mail, [email protected]). Statistical code: Available from Ms. Anderson (e-mail, [email protected]). Data set: Available from Dr. Green (e-mail, [email protected])
Corresponding Author: Beverly B. Green, MD, MPH, Group Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101-1466; e-mail, [email protected].
Current Author Addresses: Dr. Green, Ms. Anderson, Dr. Chubak, and Ms. Fuller: Group Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101-1466.
Dr. Wang: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, PO Box 19024, Seattle, WA 98109-1024.
Dr. Meenan: Kaiser Permanente Center for Health, 3800 North Interstate Avenue, Portland, OR 97227-1098.
Dr. Vernon: The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin, UCT 2560, Houston, TX 77030-5400.
Author Contributions: Conception and design: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, R.T. Meenan, S.W. Vernon.
Analysis and interpretation of the data: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, M.L. Anderson, J. Chubak, R.T. Meenan, S.W. Vernon, S. Fuller.
Drafting of the article: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, M.L. Anderson, J. Chubak, R.T. Meenan, S.W. Vernon.
Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, M.L. Anderson, J. Chubak, R.T. Meenan, S.W. Vernon, S. Fuller.
Final approval of the article: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, M.L. Anderson, J. Chubak, R.T. Meenan, S.W. Vernon, S. Fuller.
Provision of study materials or patients: B.B. Green.
Statistical expertise: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang, M.L. Anderson.
Obtaining of funding: B.B. Green, C.Y. Wang.
Administrative, technical, or logistic support: B.B. Green.
Collection and assembly of data: B.B. Green, M.L. Anderson, S. Fuller.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format





Download article citation data for:
Beverly B. Green, Ching-Yun Wang, Melissa L. Anderson, et al. An Automated Intervention With Stepped Increases in Support to Increase Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med.2013;158:301-311. [Epub 5 March 2013]. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303050-00002

View More

Get Access

Login Options:
Purchase

You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.

Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.

Create your Free Account

You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub

Related in ACP Journals

Full Text

View Full Text

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media