Browsing by Author "Tharp, Kevin"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    FEMA versus local governments: Influence and reliance in disaster preparedness
    (Springer, 2016) Sadiq, Abdul-Akeem; Tharp, Kevin; Graham, John D.; School of Public and Environmental Affairs, IUPUI
    This study uses an experimental approach to examine whether disaster information sourced to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) influences intentions to adopt hazard adjustments. Survey questions are also used to determine whether individuals rely more on FEMA or local governments when preparing for disasters. Using an online sample of 2008 US employees, the results indicate that information sourced to FEMA is no more influential than information sourced to local governments and that individuals rely less on FEMA than on local agencies during disaster preparedness. These results have significant implications for practice and future research on natural hazard preparedness.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Patient Navigation Plus Tailored Digital Video Disc Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Low-Income and Minority Patients Who Did Not Attend a Scheduled Screening Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial
    (Oxford University Press, 2024) Rawl, Susan M.; Perkins, Susan M.; Tong, Yan; Katz, Mira L.; Carter-Bawa, Lisa; Imperiale, Thomas F.; Schwartz, Peter H.; Fatima, Hala; Krier, Connie; Tharp, Kevin; Shedd-Steele, Rivienne; Magnarella, Mark; Malloy, Caeli; Haunert, Laura; Gebregziabher, Netsanet; Paskett, Electra D.; Champion, Victoria; School of Nursing
    Background: Up to 50% of people scheduled for screening colonoscopy do not complete this test and no studies have focused on minority and low-income populations. Interventions are needed to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening knowledge, reduce barriers, and provide alternative screening options. Patient navigation (PN) and tailored interventions increase CRC screening uptake, however there is limited information comparing their effectiveness or the effect of combining them. Purpose: Compare the effectiveness of two interventions to increase CRC screening among minority and low-income individuals who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointment-a mailed tailored digital video disc (DVD) alone versus the mailed DVD plus telephone-based PN compared to usual care. Methods: Patients (n = 371) aged 45-75 years at average risk for CRC who did not attend a screening colonoscopy appointment were enrolled and were randomized to: (i) a mailed tailored DVD; (ii) the mailed DVD plus phone-based PN; or (iii) usual care. CRC screening outcomes were from electronic medical records at 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to study intervention effects. Results: Participants randomized to tailored DVD plus PN were four times more likely to complete CRC screening compared to usual care and almost two and a half times more likely than those who were sent the DVD alone. Conclusions: Combining telephone-based PN with a mailed, tailored DVD increased CRC screening among low-income and minority patients who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointments and has potential for wide dissemination.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Process Evaluation of a Mailed Interactive Educational DVD in a Comparative Effectiveness Trial to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening
    (Sage, 2022) Katz, Mira L.; Emerson, Brent; Champion, Victoria L.; Schwartz, Peter H.; Impleriale, Thomas F.; Fatima, Hala; Paskett, Electra D.; Perkins, Susan M.; Tong, Yan; Gebregziabher, Netsanet; Krier, Connie; Tharp, Kevin; Malloy, Caeli; Strom, Sylvia; Rawl, Susan M.; School of Nursing
    A process evaluation was conducted as part of a comparative effectiveness trial of a mailed interactive educational DVD intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among average-risk patients who did not attend a scheduled colonoscopy. Participants (n = 371) for the trial were randomized to (1) mailed DVD, (2) mailed DVD plus patient navigation, or (3) usual care. Participants (n = 243) randomized to the two DVD intervention arms were called 2 weeks after mailing materials to complete a process evaluation interview about the DVD (September 2017-February 2020). Forty-nine (20%) participants were not reached, and 194 (80%) participants watched the DVD and completed the interview. The process evaluation assessed whether (1) the DVD content was helpful, (2) any new information was learned by participants, (3) the appropriate amount of information was included in the DVD, (4) participants were engaged when watching the DVD, (5) the DVD content was relevant, (6) participants were satisfied with the DVD (7) participants would recommend the DVD to others, and (8) their opinion about colorectal cancer screening was changed by watching the DVD. Among participants who watched the DVD, 99% reported the screening information was very or somewhat helpful, 47% learned new information, 75% said the DVD included the right amount of information, they were engaged (M = 3.35 out of 4, SD = 0.49), 87% reported all or most information applied to them, they were satisfied (M = 3.42 out of 4, SD = 0.39) with DVD content, 99% would recommend the DVD to others, and 45% reported changing their opinion about screening. To understand the effects of interventions being tested in trials and to plan the dissemination of evidence-based interventions, process evaluation is critical to assess the dose received and acceptability of behavioral interventions.