S651 Impact of Disability and Frequency of Primary Care Physician (PCP) Visits on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates

Introduction: A barrier encountered by individuals with disability in CRC screening is the frequency of visitation to a healthcare provider. We examined the impact on CRC screening rates among people with disability and their frequency of Primary Care Physician (PCP) visits. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the National Trends Survey (HINTS 5), cycle 4 of 253,815,197 households, comprising 19,241,439 individuals who have some form of disability. We used descriptive statistics to summarize survey responses and reported weighted values. We performed the analysis in R (R Core Team, 2024), calculated P-values, and assumed a 2-sided, 5% level of significance. We employed weighted logistic regression models to account for survey weights and used the quasibinomial family to allow for non-integer counts. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess these relationships, significant predictors were identified using Type III ANOVA tests, and model fit and significance were assessed using likelihood ratio tests and variance inflation factors. Results: Our model shows that the number of PCP visits increases the odds of CRC screening (odds ratio [OR] = 1.15, CI: 1.02-1.29). There is an association between CRC screening and the number of PCP visits (P < 0.05) shown in Table 1, but there is no association between CRC screening and disability (P > 0.05) in the model. Disabled individuals visit PCPs more frequently compared to those who are employed, homemakers, and students, as indicated by the positive test statistics and significant P-values (P < 0.05) in Table 2. The Anova results indicate that age and frequency of going to a provider are significant predictors, with P-values less than 0.05. This suggests that these factors have a strong influence on CRC screening rates. Conclusion: Inaccessible facilities, inability of a disabled individual to find transportation to a healthcare appointment are barriers to screening. Different types of disabilities can also hinder CRC screening rates; individuals with chronic back injuries are less likely to undergo CRC screening. Targeted interventions should be made among individuals with disabilities to increase PCP visits and increase CRC screening rates. Screening kits can be mailed to individuals with disabilities who can’t be transported for screening, improving transportation needs, and ensuring that medical facilities have easy access for individuals with disabilities are important to increase PCP visits and CRC screening rates.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0001130064.85664.7d
Primary Topic
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

S651 Impact of Disability and Frequency of Primary Care Physician (PCP) Visits on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates

Tyler Jensen, Oladoyin Jolaoye, Sonu Dhillon, Ogonna Ngwu
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
article

S651 Impact of Disability and Frequency of Primary Care Physician (PCP) Visits on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates

Tyler Jensen, Oladoyin Jolaoye, Sonu Dhillon, Ogonna Ngwu
article en

Abstract

Introduction: A barrier encountered by individuals with disability in CRC screening is the frequency of visitation to a healthcare provider. We examined the impact on CRC screening rates among people with disability and their frequency of Primary Care Physician (PCP) visits. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the National Trends Survey (HINTS 5), cycle 4 of 253,815,197 households, comprising 19,241,439 individuals who have some form of disability. We used descriptive statistics to summarize survey responses and reported weighted values. We performed the analysis in R (R Core Team, 2024), calculated P-values, and assumed a 2-sided, 5% level of significance. We employed weighted logistic regression models to account for survey weights and used the quasibinomial family to allow for non-integer counts. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess these relationships, significant predictors were identified using Type III ANOVA tests, and model fit and significance were assessed using likelihood ratio tests and variance inflation factors. Results: Our model shows that the number of PCP visits increases the odds of CRC screening (odds ratio [OR] = 1.15, CI: 1.02-1.29). There is an association between CRC screening and the number of PCP visits (P < 0.05) shown in Table 1, but there is no association between CRC screening and disability (P > 0.05) in the model. Disabled individuals visit PCPs more frequently compared to those who are employed, homemakers, and students, as indicated by the positive test statistics and significant P-values (P < 0.05) in Table 2. The Anova results indicate that age and frequency of going to a provider are significant predictors, with P-values less than 0.05. This suggests that these factors have a strong influence on CRC screening rates. Conclusion: Inaccessible facilities, inability of a disabled individual to find transportation to a healthcare appointment are barriers to screening. Different types of disabilities can also hinder CRC screening rates; individuals with chronic back injuries are less likely to undergo CRC screening. Targeted interventions should be made among individuals with disabilities to increase PCP visits and increase CRC screening rates. Screening kits can be mailed to individuals with disabilities who can’t be transported for screening, improving transportation needs, and ensuring that medical facilities have easy access for individuals with disabilities are important to increase PCP visits and CRC screening rates.

The American Journal of GastroenterologyVol. 120(10S2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.