Table 2. Program Factors Associated With Reaching Target Monthly Screening Test Volumes After Participation in the National Return-to-Screening Quality Improvement Study^a.

Characteristic	Programs, No. (%)		Adjusted OR (95% CI)	P value
	Reached target
	No (n = 181 [21%])	Yes (n = 676 [79%])
Disease site
Breast	112 (25)	340 (75)	1 [Reference]	NA
Colon	27 (20)	107 (80)	1.8 (1.0-3.2)	.04
Lung	31 (13)	213 (87)	2.8 (1.7-4.7)	<.001
Cervix	12 (41)	17 (59)	0.6 (0.3-1.3)	.18
Facility location
Northeast	36 (20)	141 (80)	1 [Reference]	NA
Midwest	51 (23)	173 (77)	1.0 (0.6-1.6)	.88
South	60 (19)	257 (81)	1.2 (0.8-2.0)	.38
West	34 (25)	105 (76)	0.9 (0.5-1.6)	.80
Type of institution
Community cancer program	27 (20)	107 (80)	1 [Reference]	NA
Comprehensive community cancer program	44 (19)	193 (81)	1.0 (0.6-1.8)	.98
Academic or research program	15 (21)	58 (80)	0.9 (0.4-1.9)	.78
Integrated network cancer program	30 (23)	101 (77)	0.7 (0.4-1.3)	.23
Other program	6 (23)	20 (77)	0.8 (0.3-2.3)	.70
National Accreditation Program of Breast Centers–accredited breast center	60 (23)	198 (77)	1.2 (0.7-2.0)	.62
Baseline screening deficit
None	73 (19)	304 (81)	1 [Reference]	NA
0%-10%	45 (22)	161 (78)	1.1 (0.7-1.6)	.82
>10%	64 (23)	212 (77)	0.8 (0.5-1.2)	.21
Intervention strategy
Single component	12 (17)	58 (83)	1 [Reference]	NA
Multicomponent	170 (22)	619 (79)	0.8 (0.4-1.6)	.51

Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; OR, odds ratio.

^a Target monthly screening test volume for each quality improvement project was calculated before the intervention according to differences in mean monthly screening test volume between representative prepandemic and pandemic time period. Reaching target during the 6-month intervention period indicated that programs achieved a minimum of 10% increase in monthly screening test volume as well as close any residual gaps in screening.