Pecuniary compensation increases participation in screening for colorectal cancer

The effect of physician density on colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis: causal inference methods for spatial data applied on regional-level data

BACKGROUND

The early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) through regular screening decreases its incidence and mortality rates and improves survival rates. Norway has an extremely high percentage of CRC cases diagnosed at late stages, with large variations across municipalities and hospital catchment areas. This study examined whether the availability of physicians related to CRC primary diagnosis and preoperative investigations, or physician density, contributes to the observed geographical differences in late-stage incidence rates.

METHOD

Municipality-level data on CRC stage at diagnosis were obtained from the Cancer Registry of Norway for the period 2012-2020. Physician density was calculated as the number of physicians related to CRC investigations, general practitioners (GPs) and specialists per 10,000 people, using physician counts per municipality and hospital areas from Statistics Norway. The relationship was examined using a novel causal inference method for spatial data-neighbourhood adjustment method via spatial smoothing (NA approach)-which allowed for studying the region-level effect of physician supply on CRC outcome by using spatially referenced data and still providing causal relationships.

RESULTS

According to the NA approach, an increase in one general practitioner per 10,000 people will result in a 3.6% (CI -0.064 to -0.008) decrease in late-stage CRC rates. For specialists, there was no evidence of a significant correlation with late-stage CRC distribution, while for both groups, GPs and specialists combined, an increase of 1 physician per 10,000 people would be equal to an average decrease in late-stage incidence rates by 2.79% (CI -0.055 to -0.001).

CONCLUSION

The study confirmed previous findings that an increase in GP supply will significantly improve CRC outcomes. In contrast to previous research, this study identified the importance of accessibility to both groups of physicians-GPs and specialists. If GPs encounter insufficient workforces in hospitals and long delays in colonoscopy scheduling, they will less often recommend colonoscopy examinations to patients. This study also highlighted the efficiency of the novel methodology for spatially referenced data, which allowed us to study the effect of physician density on cancer outcomes within a causal inference framework.

Characteristics of non-participants in a randomized colorectal cancer screening trial comparing sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical testing

Public health systems should guarantee universal access to health care services, including cancer screening. We assessed whether certain population subgroups were underrepresented among participants in colorectal cancer screening with sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Between 2012 and 2019, about 140 000 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomly invited to once‐only sigmoidoscopy or first round of FIT screening. Our study included 46 919 individuals invited to sigmoidoscopy and 70 019 to FIT between 2012 and 2017. We used logistic regression models to evaluate if demographic and socioeconomic factors and use of certain drugs were associated with participation. Twenty‐four thousand one hundred and fifty‐nine (51.5%) individuals attended sigmoidoscopy and 40 931 (58.5%) FIT screening. Male gender, young age, low education and income, being retired or unemployed, living alone, being an immigrant, long driving time to screening centre, and use of antidiabetic and psychotropic drugs were associated with low participation in both screening groups. Many of these factors also predicted low acceptance of colonoscopy after positive FIT. While male gender, young age and living alone were more strongly associated with nonparticipation in FIT than sigmoidoscopy, low education and income, being retired or immigrant and long driving time were more strongly associated with nonparticipation in sigmoidoscopy than FIT. In conclusion, participation was lower in sigmoidoscopy than FIT. Predictors of nonparticipation were similar between arms. However, low socioeconomic status, being an immigrant and long driving time affected participation more in sigmoidoscopy screening, suggesting that FIT may guarantee more equal access to screening services than sigmoidoscopy.

Payment models in primary health care: A driver of the quantity and quality of medical laboratory utilization

Physician payment models' incentives regarding many aspects of primary health care are not well understood. We focus on the case of medical laboratory utilization and examine how physicians' laboratory test ordering patterns change following a switch to a blended capitation payment model from one with fee for service enhanced with pay for performance. Also, within blended capitation, we examine differences between traditional staffing and interdisciplinary teams. Using a propensity score weighted fixed-effects specification to address selection, it is estimated that the switch to capitation leads to a short-run average of 3% fewer laboratory requisitions per patient. Patients' laboratory utilization also becomes more concentrated with the rostering physician. More importantly, using diabetes-related laboratory tests as a case study, after joining the blended model, physicians order 3% fewer inappropriate/redundant tests, and the addition of an interdisciplinary care team makes the reduction about 9%. Advances in both continuity and quality seem to be associated with blended capitation.

Ethical issues with colorectal cancer screening-a systematic review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended and implemented. However, sometimes CRC screening is not implemented despite good evidence, and some types of CRC screening are implemented despite lack of evidence. The objective of this article is to expose and elucidate relevant ethical issues in the literature on CRC screening that are important for open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

METHODS

An axiological question-based method is used for exposing and elucidating ethical issues relevant in HTA. A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed Bioethics subset, ISI Web of Knowledge, Bioethics Literature Database (BELIT), Ethics in Medicine (ETHMED), SIBIL Base dati di bioetica, LEWI Bibliographic Database on Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, and EUROETHICS identified 870 references of which 114 were found relevant according to title and abstract. The content of the included papers were subject to ethical analysis to highlight the ethical issues, concerns, and arguments.

RESULTS

A wide range of important ethical issues were identified. The main benefits are reduced relative CRC mortality rate, and potentially incidence rate, but there is no evidence of reduced absolute mortality rate. Potential harms are bleeding, perforation, false test results, overdetection, overdiagnosis, overtreatment (including unnecessary removal of polyps), and (rarely) death. Other important issues are related to autonomy and informed choice equity, justice, medicalization, and expanding disease.

CONCLUSION

A series of important ethical issues have been identified and need to be addressed in open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

Is distance to chemotherapy an obstacle to adjuvant care among the N.C. Medicaid-enrolled colon cancer patients?

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer has been linked to patient and provider characteristics but little is known about whether distance to chemotherapy providers constitutes an obstacle to chemotherapy.

METHODS

A total of 1,184 Medicaid patients diagnosed with colon cancer in North Carolina in 1999-2002 comprised the sample. Data from the N.C. Central Cancer Registry, N.C. Medicaid Claims, American Hospital Directory and US Census were merged. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between chemotherapy receipt and the distance to nearest chemotherapy provider.

RESULTS

Compared to the referent group of SEER-staged II (local) cancer patients living less than 2 miles from the nearest chemotherapy provider, the odds of receiving chemotherapy fell as the distance to the nearest provider increased. The odds ratio (OR) for those living ≥5 to <15 miles away was 0.13 [95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.04-0.39], and OR for those living ≥15 miles away was 0.06 (95% CI, 0.01-0.52). Patients diagnosed with regional, SEER-staged III (regional) cancer were less likely to receive chemotherapy if they lived in rural areas more than 20 miles away from the nearest provider (OR =0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.72). However, we found no evidence of association between chemotherapy receipt and distance to the nearest provider for regional cancer patients living in urban areas and those living in rural areas within 20 miles from the nearest chemotherapy provider.

CONCLUSIONS

Distance to provider may be an obstacle to chemotherapy for some groups of low-income colon cancer patients. Relieving travel burdens of rural patients living far from providers may help Medicaid increase guideline-consistent adjuvant care for regional cancer patients.

The Effectiveness of Health Screening

Using a matched insurant-general practitioner panel data set, we estimate the effect of a general health-screening program on individuals' health status and health-care cost. To account for selection into treatment, we use regional variation in the intensity of exposure to supply-determined screening recommendations as an instrumental variable. We find that screening participation increases inpatient and outpatient health-care costs up to 2 years after treatment substantially. In the medium run, we find cost savings in the outpatient sector, whereas in the long run, no statistically significant effects of screening on either health-care cost component can be discerned. In sum, screening participation increases health-care cost. Given that we do not find any statistically significant effect of screening participation on insurants' health status (at any point in time), we do not recommend a general health-screening program. However, given that we find some evidence for cost-saving potential for the sub-sample of younger insurants, we suggest more targeted screening programs.

Individual decision making in relation to participation in cardiovascular screening: a study of revealed and stated preferences

AIMS

The (cost-)effectiveness of a screening programme may be strongly influenced by the participation rate. The objective of this study was to compare participants' and non-participants' motives for the attendance decision as well as their overall preferences for participation in cardiovascular disease screening.

METHODS

This study sampled 1053 participants and 1006 non-participants from a screening trial and randomly allocated the participants to receive different levels of additional information about the screening programme. An ad hoc survey questionnaire about doubt and arguments in relation to the participation decision was given to participants and non-participants along with a contingent valuation task.

RESULTS

Among participants, 5% had doubt about participation and the most frequent argument was that they did not want the test result. Among non-participants, 40% would reconsider their non-participation decision after having received additional information while the remainder 60% stood by their decision and provided explicit arguments for it. After having received additional information the participants still valued the programme significantly higher than non-participants, but the difference was relatively small.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants and non-participants in cardiovascular screening programmes seem to have different strengths of preferences, which signals that their behavioural choice is founded in rational thinking. Furthermore, it appears that additional information and a second reflection about the participation decision may affect a substantial proportion of non-participants to reverse their decision, a finding that should receive policy interest.

Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus testing in Norway

Background:

New screening technologies and vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), the necessary cause of cervical cancer, may impact optimal approaches to prevent cervical cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies to inform cervical cancer prevention guidelines in Norway.

Methods:

We leveraged the primary epidemiologic and economic data from Norway to contextualise a simulation model of HPV-induced cervical cancer. The current cytology-only screening was compared with strategies involving cytology at younger ages and primary HPV-based screening at older ages (31/34+ years), an option being actively deliberated by the Norwegian government. We varied the switch-age, screening interval, and triage strategies for women with HPV-positive results. Uncertainty was evaluated in sensitivity analysis.

Results:

Current cytology-only screening was less effective and more costly than strategies that involve switching to primary HPV testing in older ages. For unvaccinated women, switching at age 34 years to primary HPV testing every 4 years was optimal given the Norwegian cost-effectiveness threshold ($83 000 per year of life saved). For vaccinated women, a 6-year screening interval was cost-effective. When we considered a wider range of strategies, we found that an earlier switch to HPV testing (at age 31 years) may be preferred.

Conclusions:

Strategies involving a switch to HPV testing for primary screening in older women is expected to be cost-effective compared with current recommendations in Norway.