Using Literature Review and Structured Hybrid Electronic/Manual Mortality Review to Identify System-Level Improvement Opportunities to Reduce Colorectal Cancer Mortality

The e-Autopsy/e-Biopsy: a systematic chart review to increase safety and diagnostic accuracy

Solving diagnostic errors is difficult and progress on preventing those errors has been slow since the 2015 National Academy of Medicine report. There are several methods used to improve diagnostic and other errors including voluntary reporting; malpractice claims; patient complaints; physician surveys, random quality reviews and audits, and peer review data which usually evaluates single cases and not the systems that allowed the error. Additionally, manual review of charts is often labor intensive and reviewer dependent. In 2010 we developed an e-Autopsy/e-Biopsy (eA/eB) methodology to aggregate cases with quality/safety/diagnostic issues, focusing on a specific population of patients and conditions. By performing a hybrid review process (cases are first filtered using administrative data followed by standardized manual chart reviews) we can efficiently identify patterns of medical and diagnostic error leading to opportunities for system improvements that have improved care for future patients. We present a detailed methodology for eA/eB studies and describe results from three successful studies on different diagnoses (ectopic pregnancy, abdominal aortic aneurysms, and advanced colon cancer) that illustrate our eA/eB process and how it reveals insights into creating systems that reduce diagnostic and other errors. The eA/eB process is innovative and transferable to other healthcare organizations and settings to identify trends in diagnostic error and other quality issues resulting in improved systems of care.

A Patient Portal-Based Commitment Device to Improve Adherence with Screening for Colorectal Cancer: a Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Despite significant investment in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, 40% of US adults are not up-to-date. Commitment devices, which are psychologically tailored approaches to enforce health goals, may be an effective method to increase CRC screening.

OBJECTIVE

Compare the effectiveness of a commitment device (patient self-ordering fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits) to standard CRC screening outreach.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were > 49 years and < 75 years, had no history of CRC, and were eligible for CRC screening.

INTERVENTION

An electronic screening reminder with an embedded order button allowed participants to order FIT kits directly from a patient portal. Those who used the order button were promptly sent a kit; those who did not were later mailed kits.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcome was completion of FIT kits. Secondary outcomes included number of days to completion, completion of follow-up for positive results, and CRC diagnosis; we also examined prior use of FIT kit. We used inverse probability of treatment weights to control for pretreatment imbalances.

KEY RESULTS

The cohort comprised 176,231 participants: 53% female; median age was 59; 11% were Asian, 21% Hispanic/Latino, 7% black, 51% White, 3% other/mixed race. Approximately 10% (N = 16,918) used the button. Using inverse probability of treatment weights, we found that those who used the button had 3.8 times the odds of completing a kit compared to participants who did not (odds ratio, 3.77; 95% confidence interval, 3.57-3.98). Within the button group, 63% of those eligible completed a FIT kit in the year prior to the button compared to 87% in the year after the button became available (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The ability to self-order screening kits may act as a commitment device that increases CRC screening. Scalable tools leveraging existing patient portals such as this can complement existing CRC outreach strategies.

A Qualitative Transcriptional Signature for the Risk Assessment of Precancerous Colorectal Lesions

It is meaningful to assess the risk of cancer incidence among patients with precancerous colorectal lesions. Comparing the within-sample relative expression orderings (REOs) of colorectal cancer patients measured by multiple platforms with that of normal colorectal tissues, a qualitative transcriptional signature consisting of 1,840 gene pairs was identified in the training data. Within an evaluation dataset of 16 active and 18 inactive (remissive) ulcerative colitis subjects, the median incidence risk score of colorectal carcinoma was 0.6402 in active ulcerative colitis subjects, significantly higher than that in remissive subjects (0.3114). Evaluation of two other independent datasets yielded similar results. Moreover, we found that the score significantly positively correlated with the degree of dysplasia in the case of colorectal adenomas. In the merged dataset, the median incidence risk score was 0.9027 among high-grade adenoma samples, significantly higher than that among low-grade adenomas (0.8565). In summary, the developed incidence risk score could well predict the incidence risk of precancerous colorectal lesions and has value in clinical application.