Reasons For Lack of Follow-up Colonoscopy Among Persons With A Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test Result: A Qualitative Study

Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in colorectal cancer screening in a large organization with universal insurance before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Israel is regarded as a country with a developed economy and a moderate income inequality index. In this population-based study, we aimed to measure the inequalities in colorectal cancer screening within Clalit Health, an organization with universal insurance, before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

SETTING

Retrospective analysis within Clalit Health Services, Israel.

METHODS

We evaluated the rate of being up to date with screening (having a colonoscopy within 10 years or a fecal occult blood test within 1 year) and the colonoscopy completion rate (having a colonoscopy within 6 months of a positive fecal occult blood test) among subjects aged 50-75 in 2019-2021.

RESULTS

In 2019, out of 918,135 subjects, 61.3% were up to date with screening; high socioeconomic status: 65.9% (referent), medium-socioeconomic status: 60.1% (odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.82), low-socioeconomic status: 59.0% (odds ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.75); Jews: 61.9% (referent), Arabs: 59.7% (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.92), Ultraorthodox-Jews: 51.7% (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.78). Out of 21,308 with a positive fecal occult blood test, the colonoscopy completion rate was 51.8%; high-socioeconomic status: 59.8% (referent), medium-socioeconomic status: 54.1% (odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.86), low-socioeconomic status: 45.5% (odds ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.65); Jews: 54.7% (referent), Ultraorthodox-Jews: 51.4% (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.92), Arabs: 44.7% (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.78). In 2020-2021, there was a slight drop in the rate of being up to date with screening, while most of the discrepancies were kept or slightly increased with time.

CONCLUSIONS

We report significant inequalities in colorectal cancer screening before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Israel, despite a declared policy of equality and universal insurance.

Patterns of Care Following a Positive Fecal Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer: A Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Multilevel barriers to colonoscopy after a positive fecal blood test for colorectal cancer (CRC) are well-documented. A less-explored barrier to appropriate follow-up is repeat fecal testing after a positive test. We investigated this phenomenon using mixed methods.

DESIGN

This sequential mixed methods study included quantitative data from a large cohort of patients 50-89 years from four healthcare systems with a positive fecal test 2010-2018 and qualitative data from interviews with physicians and patients.

MAIN MEASURES

Logistic regression was used to evaluate whether repeat testing was associated with failure to complete subsequent colonoscopy and to identify factors associated with repeat testing. Interviews were coded and analyzed to explore reasons for repeat testing.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 316,443 patients had a positive fecal test. Within 1 year, 76.3% received a colonoscopy without repeat fecal testing, 3% repeated testing and then received a colonoscopy, 4.4% repeated testing without colonoscopy, and 16.3% did nothing. Among repeat testers (7.4% of total cohort, N = 23,312), 59% did not receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. In adjusted models, those with an initial positive test followed by a negative second test were significantly less likely to receive colonoscopy than those with two successive positive tests (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.35-0.40). Older age (65-75 vs. 50-64 years: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41) and higher comorbidity score (≥ 4 vs. 0: OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.67-1.83) were significantly associated with repeat testing compared to those who received colonoscopy without repeat tests. Qualitative interview data revealed reasons underlying repeat testing, including colonoscopy avoidance, bargaining, and disbelief of positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients in this cohort, 7.4% repeated fecal testing after an initial positive test. Of those, over half did not go on to receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. Efforts to improve CRC screening must address repeat fecal testing after a positive test as a barrier to completing colonoscopy.

Health utility assessments in individuals undergoing diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopy: improved discrimination with a cancer-specific scale

PURPOSE

To compare the sensitivity and discriminant validity of generic and cancer-specific measures for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for individuals undergoing diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

HRQoL was assessed using EQ-5D-5L (generic), and EORTC QLQ-C30 (cancer-specific) scales, 14 days after (baseline) and one-year following colonoscopy (follow-up). Utility scores were calculated by mapping EORTC-QLQ-C30 onto QLU-C10D. Differences between participants with different indications for colonoscopy (positive faecal occult blood test (FOBT), surveillance, or symptoms) and colonoscopy findings (no polyps, polyps, or cancer) were tested using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis H tests. Sensitivity was assessed by calculating the ceiling effects (proportion reporting the best possible level).

RESULTS

246 adults completed the survey, including those undergoing colonoscopy for symptoms (n = 87), positive FOBT (n = 92) or surveillance (n = 67). Those with symptoms had the lowest HRQoL at both baseline and follow-up, with differences observed within the HRQoL domains/areas of role function, appetite loss and bowel function on the QLU-C10D. No differences were found in HRQoL when stratified by findings at colonoscopy with both measures or when comparing baseline and follow-up responses. Participants reporting full health with EQ-5D-5L (21% at baseline and 16% at follow-up) still had problems on the QLU-C10D, with fatigue and sleep at baseline and with role function and fatigue at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing colonoscopy for symptoms had lower HRQoL compared to surveillance or positive FOBT. The cancer-specific QLU-C10D was more sensitive and had greater discriminant ability between patients undergoing colonoscopy for different indications.

A digital intake tool to avert outpatient visits in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening population: study protocol of a multicentre, prospective non-randomized trial - the DIT-trial

BACKGROUND

Currently all participants of the Dutch colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) are seen at the outpatient clinic to assess their health status, receive information on colonoscopy and CRC risk, and provide informed consent. However, for many patients this information could probably also safely be exchanged in an online setting, in order to reduce the burden for patients, healthcare system, and environment. In this study we will evaluate if a face-to-face pre-colonoscopy consultation can be replaced by a Digital Intake Tool (DIT) in a CRC screening population.

METHODS

This is a prospective multicentre single-arm, non-randomized study with a non-inferiority design. The DIT will triage a total of 1000 participants and inform them about CRC risk, colonoscopy, sedation, and provide bowel preparation instructions. Participants identified as high-risk (i.e., red-triaged) will be contacted by phone or scheduled for an appointment at the outpatient clinic. The primary outcome measure will be adequate bowel preparation rate, defined as the proportion of participants with a Boston Bowel Preparation (BBPS) score ≥ 6. To compare our primary outcome, we will use colonoscopy data from 1000 FIT positive participants who visited the outpatient clinic for pre-colonoscopy consultation. Secondary outcomes will include participation rate, colonoscopy adherence rate, patient experience in terms of satisfaction and anxiety, knowledge transfer, number of outpatient visits that can be averted by the DIT, and cost-effectiveness of the tool. Ethical approval was obtained from the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus Medical Center (MEC-2021-0098).

DISCUSSION

This study aims to assess if a face-to-face pre-colonoscopy consultation can be replaced by an eHealth assessment and education tool in a FIT-based CRC screening program. In case favourable results are established, the intervention evaluated in this study could significantly impact CRC screening programs, benefiting both patients and healthcare systems on a (inter)national scale. Additionally, it would enable more personalized care as the DIT can be easily customized and made feasible in other languages, thereby enhancing healthcare accessibility.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register: NL9315 , date of registration: March 8th, 2021.

Abnormal Colorectal Cancer Test Follow-Up: A Quality Improvement Initiative at a Federally Qualified Health Center

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy completion rates after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are suboptimal, resulting in missed opportunities for early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer. Patient navigation and structured follow-up may improve colonoscopy completion, but implementation of these strategies is not widespread.

METHODS

We conducted a quality improvement study using a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Model to increase colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT in a large federally qualified health center serving a diverse and low-income population. Intervention components included patient navigation, and a checklist to promote completion of key steps required for abnormal FIT follow-up. Primary outcome was proportion of patients achieving colonoscopy completion within 6 months of abnormal FIT, assessed at baseline for 156 patients pre-intervention, and compared to 208 patients during the intervention period from April 2017 to December 2019. Drop offs at each step in the follow-up process were assessed.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy completion improved from 21% among 156 patients with abnormal FIT pre-intervention, to 38% among 208 patients with abnormal FIT during the intervention (P < .001; absolute increase: 17%, 95% CI: 6.9%-25.2%). Among the 130 non-completers during the intervention period, lack of completion was attributable to absence of colonoscopy referral for 7.7%; inability to schedule a pre-colonoscopy specialist visit for 71.5%; failure to complete a pre-colonoscopy visit for 2.3%; the absence of colonoscopy scheduling for 9.2%; failure to show for a scheduled colonoscopy for 9.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient navigation and structured follow-up appear to improve colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT. Additional strategies are needed to achieve optimal rates of completion.

Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy vs Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines include screening colonoscopy and sequential high-sensitivity fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT), with expectation of similar effectiveness based on the assumption of similar high adherence. However, adherence to screening colonoscopy compared with sequential HSgFOBT has not been reported. In this randomized clinical trial, we assessed adherence and pathology findings for a single screening colonoscopy vs sequential and nonsequential HSgFOBTs.

METHODS

Participants aged 40-69 years were enrolled at 3 centers representing different clinical settings. Participants were randomized into a single screening colonoscopy arm vs sequential HSgFOBT arm composed of 4-7 rounds. Initial adherence to screening colonoscopy and sequential adherence to HSgFOBT, follow-up colonoscopy for positive HSgFOBT tests, crossover to colonoscopy, and detection of advanced neoplasia or large serrated lesions (ADN-SERs) were measured.

RESULTS

There were 3523 participants included in the trial; 1761 and 1762 participants were randomized to the screening colonoscopy and HSgFOBT arms, respectively. Adherence was 1473 (83.6%) for the screening colonoscopy arm vs 1288 (73.1%) for the HSgFOBT arm after 1 round (relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.19; P ≤ .001), but only 674 (38.3%) over 4 sequential HSgFOBT rounds (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 2.05-2.33). Overall adherence to any screening increased to 1558 (88.5%) in the screening colonoscopy arm during the entire study period and 1493 (84.7%) in the HSgFOBT arm (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07). Four hundred thirty-six participants (24.7%) crossed over to screening colonoscopy during the first 4 rounds. ADN-SERs were detected in 121 of the 1473 participants (8.2%) in the colonoscopy arm who were adherent to protocol in the first 12 months of the study, whereas detection of ADN-SERs among those who were not sequentially adherent (n = 709) to HSgFOBT was subpar (0.6%) (RR, 14.72; 95% CI, 5.46-39.67) compared with those who were sequentially adherent (3.3%) (n = 647) (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.61-3.98) to HSgFOBT in the first 4 rounds. When including colonoscopies from HSgFOBT patients who were never positive yet crossed over (n = 1483), 5.5% of ADN-SERs were detected (RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.15-1.96) in the first 4 rounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Observed adherence to sequential rounds of HSgFOBT was suboptimal compared with a single screening colonoscopy. Detection of ADN-SERs was inferior when nonsequential HSgFOBT adherence was compared with sequential adherence. However, the greatest number of ADN-SERs was detected among those who crossed over to colonoscopy and opted to receive a colonoscopy. The effectiveness of an HSgFOBT screening program may be enhanced if crossover to screening colonoscopy is permitted.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, Number: NCT00102011.

Subsequent participation in organized FIT based screening following screen-derived colonoscopy - A Danish nationwide cohort study

Introduction

In the Danish National Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening program, participants with screen-detected low-risk adenomas are invited to a new faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening after two years. However, participation rate in next FIT screening is unknown. We aimed to investigate this subsequent participation rate within the Danish CRC screening program.

Methods

This nationwide register-based study included participants aged 50-72 years registered with FIT screening in the Danish CRC screening program between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. Participants were included if their index FIT was negative or if it was positive and the subsequent colonoscopy detected low-risk adenomas. Invitees were categorized as subsequent participants if they returned a FIT within 135 days following the invitation to screening. We estimated the relative risk for participation depending on screening outcome, age, and sex.

Result

415,107 with a negative result and 5,550 with low-risk adenomas were included. 86.0% (85.9;86.1) of the invitees with a negative result participated in the subsequent screening, while 71.8% (70.6;73.0) of the invitees with low-risk adenomas participated subsequently. The risk of participation in the subsequent screening was significantly lower among all age groups of men and women with low-risk adenomas compared to similar groups with negative results.

Conclusion

Invitees with low-risk adenomas detected at their initial colonoscopy are less likely to participate in the subsequent screening than invitees with negative results. This association was found in all age groups and for both sexes. Further studies are necessary to assess whether non-attendance is more pronounced in specific subgroups.

Improving colorectal cancer screening - consumer-centred technological interventions to enhance engagement and participation amongst diverse cohorts

The current "Gold Standard" colorectal cancer (CRC) screening approach of faecal occult blood test (FOBT) with follow-up colonoscopy has been shown to significantly improve morbidity and mortality, by enabling the early detection of disease. However, its efficacy is predicated on high levels of population participation in screening. Several international studies have shown continued low rates of screening participation, especially amongst highly vulnerable lower socio-economic cohorts, with minimal improvement using current recruitment strategies. Research suggests that a complex of dynamic factors (patient, clinician, and the broader health system) contribute to low citizen engagement. This paper argues that the challenges of screening participation can be better addressed by (1) developing dynamic multifaceted technological interventions collaboratively across stakeholders using human-centered design; (2) integrating consumer-centred artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to maximise ease of use for CRC screening; and (3) tailored strategies that maximise population screening engagement, especially amongst the most vulnerable.

Reasons for No Colonoscopy After an Unfavorable Screening Result in Dutch Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Nationwide Questionnaire

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess participant-reported factors associated with non-follow-up with colonoscopy in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

In May 2019, we distributed a nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire (n = 4,009) to participants in the Dutch CRC screening program who received a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Among respondents who reported no colonoscopy, we assessed the presence of a contraindication, and those without were compared with those who reported colonoscopy by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 2,225 respondents (56% response rate), 730 (33%) reported no colonoscopy. A contraindication was reported by 55% (n = 404). Decisional difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 0.29; 95% CI, 0.18-0.47), lacking the opportunity to discuss the FIT outcome (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72), and a low estimated risk of CRC (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.76) were negatively associated with follow-up. Knowledge items negatively associated with follow-up included having an alternative explanation for the positive FIT (OR = 0.3; 95% CI, 0.21-0.43), having trust in the ability to self-detect CRC (OR = 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.65), and thinking that polyp removal is ineffective (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.82). The belief that the family physician would support colonoscopy showed the strongest positive association with follow-up (OR = 2.84; 95% CI, 2.01-4.02) CONCLUSIONS: Because decisional difficulties and certain convictions regarding CRC and screening are associated with non-follow-up, personalized screening counseling might be an intervention worth exploring as a means of improving follow-up in the Dutch CRC screening program. Involving family physicians might also prove beneficial.

Effect of Chronic Comorbidities on Follow-up Colonoscopy After Positive Colorectal Cancer Screening Results: A Population-Based Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are colorectal cancer screening tests used to identify individuals requiring further investigation with colonoscopy. Delayed colonoscopy after positive FOBT (FOBT+) is associated with poorer cancer outcomes. We assessed the effect of comorbidity on colonoscopy receipt within 12 months after FOBT+.

METHODS

Population-based healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, were linked to assemble a cohort of 50-74-year-old individuals with FOBT+ results between 2008 and 2017. The associations between comorbidities and colonoscopy receipt within 12 months after FOBT+ were examined using multivariable cause-specific hazard regression models.

RESULTS

Of 168,701 individuals with FOBT+, 80.5% received colonoscopy within 12 months. In multivariable models, renal failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.82), heart failure (HR 0.77, CI 0.75-0.80), and serious mental illness (HR 0.88, CI 0.85-0.92) were associated with the lowest colonoscopy rates, compared with not having each condition. The number of medical conditions was inversely associated with colonoscopy uptake (≥4 vs 0: HR 0.64, CI 0.58-0.69; 3 vs 0: HR 0.75, CI 0.72-0.78; and 2 vs 0: HR 0.87, CI 0.85-0.89). Having both medical and mental health conditions was associated with a lower colonoscopy uptake relative to no comorbidity (HR 0.88, CI 0.87-0.90).

DISCUSSION

Persons with medical and mental health conditions had lower colonoscopy rates after FOBT+ than those without these conditions. Better strategies are needed to optimize colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in individuals with comorbidities.

AI and Clinical Decision Making: The Limitations and Risks of Computational Reductionism in Bowel Cancer Screening

Advances in artificial intelligence in healthcare are frequently promoted as ‘solutions’ to improve the accuracy, safety, and quality of clinical decisions, treatments, and care. Despite some diagnostic success, however, AI systems rely on forms of reductive reasoning and computational determinism that embed problematic assumptions about clinical decision-making and clinical practice. Clinician autonomy, experience, and judgement are reduced to inputs and outputs framed as binary or multi-class classification problems benchmarked against a clinician’s capacity to identify or predict disease states. This paper examines this reductive reasoning in AI systems for colorectal cancer (CRC) to highlight their limitations and risks: (1) in AI systems themselves due to inherent biases in (a) retrospective training datasets and (b) embedded assumptions in underlying AI architectures and algorithms; (2) in the problematic and limited evaluations being conducted on AI systems prior to system integration in clinical practice; and (3) in marginalising socio-technical factors in the context-dependent interactions between clinicians, their patients, and the broader health system. The paper argues that to optimise benefits from AI systems and to avoid negative unintended consequences for clinical decision-making and patient care, there is a need for more nuanced and balanced approaches to AI system deployment and evaluation in CRC.

Could a Behavioral Model Explain Adherence to Second-Level Colonoscopy for Colon Cancer Screening? Results of a Cross-Sectional Study of the Palermo Province Population

According to Italian Essential Levels of Assistance (ELA), a colonoscopy is strongly recommended after a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) due to its effectiveness in early colorectal cancer detection. Despite the evidence, the Palermo province population (Italy), after a positive FOBT, have a lower colonoscopy adherence compared to Italian standards. This cross-sectional study analyzed patients’ perceptions of colonoscopy procedures to understand the reasons for non-adherence. Patients with a positive FOBT who did not undergo a colonoscopy within the national organized screening program were administered a telephone interview based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) questionnaire. The number of non-compliant patients with a colonoscopy after a positive FOBT were 182, of which 45 (25.7%) patients had undergone a colonoscopy in another healthcare setting. Among the HBM items, in a multivariate analysis only perceived benefits were significantly associated with colonoscopy adherence (aOR = 6.7, p = 0.03). Health promotion interventions should focus on the importance of the benefits of colorectal screening adherence to prevent colorectal cancer, implementing health communication by healthcare workers that have closer contacts with people, as general practitioners.

Timely Colonoscopy After Positive Fecal Immunochemical Tests in the Veterans Health Administration: A Qualitative Assessment of Current Practice and Perceived Barriers

INTRODUCTION

The Veterans Health Administration introduced a clinical reminder system in 2018 to help address process gaps in colorectal cancer screening, including the diagnostic evaluation of positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. We conducted a qualitative study to explore the differences between facilities who performed in the top vs bottom decile for follow-up colonoscopy.

METHODS

Seventeen semistructured interviews with gastroenterology (GI) providers and staff were conducted at 9 high-performing and 8 low-performing sites.

RESULTS

We identified 2 domains, current practices and perceived barriers, and most findings were described by both high- and low-performing sites. Findings exclusive to 1 group mainly pertained to current practices, especially arranging colonoscopy for FIT-positive patients. We observed only 1 difference in the perceived barriers domain, which pertained to primary care providers.

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that what primarily distinguishes high- and low-performing sites is not a difference in barriers but rather in the GI clinical care process. Developing and disseminating patient education materials about the importance of diagnostic colonoscopy, eliminating in-person precolonoscopy visits when clinically appropriate, and involving GI in missed colonoscopy appointments and outside referrals should all be considered to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates. Our study illustrates the challenges of performing a timely colonoscopy after a positive FIT result and provides insights on improving the clinical care process for patients who are at substantially increased risk for colorectal cancer.

Patient Navigation After Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test Results Increases Diagnostic Colonoscopy and Highlights Multilevel Barriers to Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a common colorectal cancer screening modality in the USA but often is not followed by diagnostic colonoscopy.

AIMS

We investigated the efficacy of patient navigation to increase diagnostic colonoscopy after positive FIT results and determined persistent barriers to follow-up despite navigation in a large, academic healthcare system.

METHODS

The study cohort included all health system outpatients with an assigned primary care provider, a positive FIT result between 12/01/2016 and 06/01/2019, and no documentation of colonoscopy after positive FIT. Two non-clinical patient navigators engaged patients and providers to encourage follow-up, offer solutions to barriers, and assist with colonoscopy scheduling. The primary intervention endpoint was completion of colonoscopy within 6 months of navigation. We documented reasons for persistent barriers to colonoscopy despite navigation and determined predictors of successful follow-up after navigation.

RESULTS

There were 119 patients who received intervention. Of these, 37 (31.1%) patients completed colonoscopy at 6 months. In 41/119 (34.5%) cases, the PCP did not recommend colonoscopy, most commonly due to a normal colonoscopy prior to the positive FIT (19, 46.3%). There were 41/119 patients (34.5%) that declined colonoscopy despite the patient navigator and the PCP order. Male sex and younger age were significant predictors of follow-up (aOR = 2.91, 95%CI, 1.18-7.13; aOR = 0.92, 95%CI, 0.87-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

After implementation of patient navigation, diagnostic colonoscopy was completed for 31.1% of patients with a positive FIT result. However, navigation also highlighted persistent multilevel barriers to follow-up. Future work will develop targeted solutions for these barriers to further increase FIT follow-up rates in our health system.

Perceptions on Barriers and Facilitators to Colonoscopy Completion After Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Results in a Safety Net System

IMPORTANCE

The effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), relies on colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal results, but in safety net systems and federally qualified health centers, in which FIT is frequently used, colonoscopy completion within 1 year of an abnormal result rarely exceeds 50%. Clinician-identified factors in follow-up of abnormal FIT results are understudied and could lead to more effective interventions to address this issue.

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinician-identified barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal FIT results in a safety net health care system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study was conducted using semistructured key informant interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) and staff members in a large safety net health care system in Washington state. Eligible clinicians were recruited through all-staff meetings and clinic medical directors. Interviews were conducted from February to December 2020 through face-to-face interactions or digital meeting platforms. Interview transcripts were analyzed deductively and inductively using a content analysis approach. Data were analyzed from September through December 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT result were identified by PCPs and staff members.

RESULTS

Among 21 participants, there were 10 PCPs and 11 staff members; 20 participants provided demographic information. The median (interquartile range) age was 38.5 (33.0-51.5) years, 17 (85.0%) were women, and 9 participants (45.0%) spent more than 75% of their working time engaging in patient care. All participants identified social determinants of health, organizational factors, and patient cognitive factors as barriers to colonoscopy completion. Participants suggested that existing resources that addressed these factors facilitated colonoscopy completion but were insufficient to meet national follow-up colonoscopy goals.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this qualitative study, responses of interviewed PCPs and staff members suggested that the barriers to colonoscopy completion in a safety net health system may be modifiable. These findings suggest that interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal FIT results should be informed by clinician-identified factors to address multilevel challenges to colonoscopy completion.

Barriers and facilitators towards colonoscopy: a qualitative systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy is integral in the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), be it for screening, diagnostic or therapeutic intentions. Despite the presence of multiple screening modalities, colonoscopy remains integral in providing a definitive CRC diagnosis. However, uptake rates remain low worldwide with minimal understanding towards stakeholders' perspectives. This systematic review is the first to outline the barriers and facilitators faced by providers and patients in receiving colonoscopy specifically.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, our systematic review consolidates findings from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core collection. All perceptions of healthcare providers and screening participants aged 45 and above towards colonoscopy were included.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles were included in our review. Five major analytical themes were identified - procedural perceptions, personal experiences, thoughts and concerns, societal influences, doctor-patient relationship and healthcare system. The discrepancies in knowledge between patients and providers have evidently reduced in the present decade, potentially attributable to the rising influence of social media. The sharing of providers' personal experiences, involvement of patients' family in colonoscopy recommendations and propagation of patients' positive recounts were also more apparent in the past compared to the present decade, highlighting the need to reevaluate the balance between medical confidentiality and personal touch. Additionally, Asian patients were reportedly more apathetic towards CRC diagnosis due to their strong belief in destiny, a crucial association consistent with present studies.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights pertinent gaps in our healthcare system, providing crucial groundwork for interventions to be enacted in engendering higher colonoscopy uptake rates.

Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal breast cancer screening mammograms in primary care: a systematic review

Background

Successful breast cancer screening relies on timely follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal mammograms undermines the potential benefits of screening and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, a comprehensive review of inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care has not previously been reported in the literature. This review could identify modifiable factors that influence follow-up, which if addressed, may lead to improved follow-up and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic literature review to determine the extent of inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms in primary care and identify factors impacting on follow-up was conducted. Relevant studies published between 1 January, 1990 and 29 October, 2020 were identified by searching MEDLINE®, Embase, CINAHL® and Cochrane Library, including reference and citation checking. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were used to assess the risk of bias of included studies according to study design.

Results

Eighteen publications reporting on 17 studies met inclusion criteria; 16 quantitative and two qualitative studies. All studies were conducted in the United States, except one study from the Netherlands. Failure to follow-up abnormal screening mammograms within 3 and at 6 months ranged from 7.2–33% and 27.3–71.6%, respectively. Women of ethnic minority and lower education attainment were more likely to have inadequate follow-up. Factors influencing follow-up included physician-patient miscommunication, information overload created by automated alerts, the absence of adequate retrieval systems to access patient’s results and a lack of coordination of patient records. Logistical barriers to follow-up included inconvenient clinic hours and inconsistent primary care providers. Patient navigation and case management with increased patient education and counselling by physicians was demonstrated to improve follow-up.

Conclusions

Follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care is suboptimal. However, interventions addressing amendable factors that negatively impact on follow-up have the potential to improve follow-up, especially for populations of women at risk of inadequate follow-up.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08100-3.

Motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice after a positive colorectal cancer screening test result: a qualitative study

SETTING

Participants with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) have a high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. They are therefore recommended follow-up by colonoscopy. However, more than ten percent of positively screened persons do not adhere to this advice.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate FIT-positive individuals' motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice in the Dutch CRC screening program.

SUBJECTS

Non-adherent FIT-positive participants of the Dutch CRC screening program.

DESIGN

We conducted semi structured in-depth interviews with 17 persons who did not undergo colonoscopy within 6 months after a positive FIT. Interviews were undertaken face-to-face and data were analysed thematically with open coding and constant comparison.

RESULTS

All participants had multifactorial motives for non-adherence. A preference for more personalised care was described with the following themes: aversion against the design of the screening program, expectations of personalised care, emotions associated with experiences of impersonal care and a desire for counselling where options other than colonoscopy could be discussed. Furthermore, intrinsic motives were: having a perception of low risk for CRC (described by all participants), aversion and fear of colonoscopy, distrust, reluctant attitude to the treatment of cancer and cancer fatalism. Extrinsic motives were: having other health issues or priorities, practical barriers, advice from a general practitioner (GP) and financial reasons.

CONCLUSION

Personalised screening counselling might have helped to improve the interviewees' experiences with the screening program as well as their knowledge on CRC and CRC screening. Future studies should explore whether personalised screening counselling also has potential to increase adherence rates. Key points Participants with a positive FIT in two-step colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are at high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. Non-adherence after an unfavourable screening result happens in all CRC programs worldwide with the consequence that many of the participants do not undergo colonoscopy for the definitive assessment of the presence of colorectal cancer. Little qualitative research has been done to study the reasons why individuals participate in the first step of the screening but not in the second step. We found a preference for more personalised care, which was not reported in previous literature on this subject. Furthermore, intrinsic factors, such as a low risk perception and distrust, and extrinsic factors, such as the presence of other health issues and GP advice, may also play a role in non-adherence. A person-centred approach in the form of a screening counselling session may be beneficial for this group of CRC screening participants.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Making FIT Count: Maximizing Appropriate Use of the Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the most common and deadly malignancies despite advancements in screening, diagnostic capabilities, and treatment. The ability to detect and remove precancerous and cancerous lesions via screening has altered the epidemiology of the disease, decreasing incidence, mortality, and late-stage disease presentation. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a screening test that aims to detect human hemoglobin in the stool. FIT is the most common CRC screening modality worldwide and second most common in the United States. Its use in screening programs has been shown to increase screening uptake and improve CRC outcomes. However, FIT-based screening programs vary widely in quality and effectiveness. In health systems with high-quality FIT screening programs, only superior FIT formats are used, providers order FIT appropriately, annual patient participation is high, and diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal result is achieved in a timely manner. Proper utilization of FIT involves multiple steps beyond provider recommendation of the test. In this commentary, we aim to highlight ongoing challenges in FIT screening and suggest interventions to maximize FIT effectiveness. Through active engagement of patients and providers, health systems can use FIT to help optimize CRC screening rates and improve CRC outcomes.

Patients without colonoscopic follow-up after abnormal fecal immunochemical tests are often unaware of the abnormal result and report several barriers to colonoscopy

Background

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is the second most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modality in the United States; yet, follow-up of abnormal FIT results with diagnostic colonoscopy is underutilized. Our objective was to determine patient-reported barriers to diagnostic colonoscopy following abnormal FIT in an academic healthcare setting.

Methods

We included patients age 50–75 with an abnormal FIT result between 1/1/2015 and 10/31/2017 and no documented follow-up diagnostic colonoscopy. We abstracted demographic data from the electronic health record (EHR). Study personnel conducted telephone surveys with patients to confirm colonoscopy completion and elicit data on notification of FIT results and barriers to colonoscopy. We also provided brief verbal education about diagnostic colonoscopy. We calculated frequencies of demographic data and survey responses and compared survey responses by interest in colonoscopy after education.

Results

We surveyed 67 patients. Fifty-one were aware of the abnormal FIT result, and a majority learned of the abnormal FIT result by direct communication with providers (19, 37.3%) or EHR messaging (11, 21.6%). Overall, fifty-three patients (79.1%) confirmed lack of colonoscopy, citing provider-related (19, 35.8%), patient-related (16, 30.2%), system-related (1, 1.9%), or multifactorial (17, 32.1%) reasons. Lack of knowledge of FIT result (14, 26.4%) was most common. After brief education, 20 (37.7%) patients requested colonoscopy.

Conclusion

Patients with an abnormal FIT reported various multi-level barriers to diagnostic colonoscopy after abnormal FIT, including knowledge of FIT results. When provided with brief education, participants expressed interest in diagnostic colonoscopy. Future efforts will evaluate interventions to improve colonoscopy follow-up.

Preference and Experience of Colonic Examination for Participants Presenting to Hospitals with a Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test Result

PURPOSE

Patients who test positive on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) are referred for colonoscopy for further diagnostic evaluation. Colonoscopy is not a perfect method and may be a challenge for some FIT-positive patients. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is an alternative method that is less invasive and allows examination of the whole colon. The study objective was to evaluate the preference of FIT-positive patients for either colonoscopy or CTC for CRC examination.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Individuals older than 40 years with a positive FIT test at eight Japanese hospitals between December 2012 and July 2015 were invited to participate. Participants were given detailed information regarding colonoscopy and CTC before deciding on either examination. They completed questionnaires before the procedure regarding their preference and after the procedure regarding their experience.

RESULTS

The pre- and post-questionnaires of 846 and 834 participants, respectively, were analyzed. Participants preferred colonoscopy over CTC (colonoscopy, 72%; CTC, 28%). The possibility of obtaining biopsy samples and removing colorectal polyps during the procedure was the main reason for colonoscopy selection. Patients selected CTC to reduce discomfort but reported that CTC bowel preparation was more burdensome than colonoscopy bowel preparation. The overall experience of the examination did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy is the standard examination for FIT-positive patients. However, when given a choice, almost one-third of participants chose CTC because they thought it would be a more "comfortable" examination. Clinicians should therefore be aware of patients' potential preference for noninvasive colorectal examinations.