Impact of a generalizable reminder system on colorectal cancer screening in diverse primary care practices: a report from the prompting and reminding at encounters for prevention project

Effects of a Community-to-Clinic Navigation Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Underserved People

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal among poor and underserved people.

PURPOSE

We tested the effectiveness of a community-to-clinic navigator intervention to guide multicultural, underinsured individuals into primary care clinics to complete colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

This two-phase behavioral intervention study was conducted in Phoenix, Arizona (2012-2018). Community sites were randomized to group education or group education plus tailored navigation to increase attendance at primary care clinics (Phase I). Individuals who completed a clinic appointment received the tailored navigation in person or via phone (Phase II).

RESULTS

In Phase I (N = 345), 37.9% of the intervention group scheduled a clinic appointment versus 19.4% of the comparison group. In Phase II, 26.5% of the original intervention group were screened versus only 10.4% of the original comparison group. Those in the intervention group were 3.84 times more likely to be screened than were those in the comparison group (odds ratio = 3.84; 95% confidence interval = 1.81-6.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Translation of an efficacious tailored navigation intervention for colorectal cancer screening to a community-to-clinic context is associated with significantly increased rates of colorectal cancer screening. Navigation assistance to address barriers to screening may serve as the most important component of any educational program to increase individual adherence to colorectal cancer screening.

An Examination of Multilevel Factors Influencing Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Accountable Care Organization Settings: A Mixed-Methods Study

OBJECTIVE

To identify patient, provider, and delivery system-level factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and validate findings across multiple data sets.

DESIGN

A concurrent mixed-methods design using electronic health records, provider survey, and provider interview.

SETTING

Eight primary care accountable care organization clinics in Nebraska.

MEASURES

Patients' demographic/social characteristics, health utilization behaviors, and perceptions toward CRC screening; provider demographics and practice patterns; and clinics' delivery systems (eg, reminder system).

ANALYSIS

Quantitative (frequencies, logistic regression, and t tests) and qualitative analyses (thematic coding).

RESULTS

At the patient level, being 65 years of age and older (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34, P < .001), being non-Hispanic white (OR = 1.93, P < .001), having insurance (OR = 1.90, P = .01), having an annual physical examination (OR = 2.36, P < .001), and having chronic conditions (OR = 1.65 for 1-2 conditions, P < .001) were associated positively with screening, compared with their counterparts. The top 5 patient-level barriers included discomfort/pain of the procedure (60.3%), finance/cost (57.4%), other priority health issues (39.7%), lack of awareness (36.8%), and health literacy (26.5%). At the provider level, being female (OR = 1.88, P < .001), having medical doctor credentials (OR = 3.05, P < .001), and having a daily patient load less than 15 (OR = 1.50, P = .01) were positively related to CRC screening. None of the delivery system factors were significant except the reminder system. Interview data provided in-depth information on how these factors help or hinder CRC screening. Discrepancies in findings were observed in chronic condition, colonoscopy performed by primary doctors, and the clinic-level system factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study informs practitioners and policy makers on the effective multilevel strategies to promote CRC screening in primary care accountable care organization or equivalent settings. Some inconsistent findings between data sources require additional prospective cohort studies to validate those identified factors in question. The strategies may include (1) developing programs targeting relatively younger age groups or racial/ethnic minorities, (2) adapting multilevel/multicomponent interventions to address low demands and access of local population, (3) promoting annual physical examination as a cost-effective strategy, and (4) supporting organizational capacity and infrastructure (eg, IT system) to facilitate implementation of evidence-based interventions.

Impact of a Primary Care intervention on the colorectal cancer early detection programme

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of a telephonic interview performed by primary care professionals among non-participants in the first round of the colorectal cancer early detection programme in the basic urban health area Guineueta in Barcelona, Spain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Primary Healthcare Team of La Guineueta contacted people who did not respond to the invitation to the first round of the colorectal cancer early detection programme using a standardised telephone call protocol. We analysed the impact of the intervention based on participation and diagnosed disease.

RESULTS

We made 3,327 phone calls to 2,343 people. After the intervention the participation rate was 54.9%, which meant an increase of 5.7% with respect to the participation in the usual protocol for the programme (49.2%). The intervention allowed 5cancers, 2high-risk neoplasms and 8low- and intermediate-risk lesions to be diagnosed. An average of 9phone calls was necessary to achieve the participation of one additional person.

DISCUSSION

The telephonic intervention performed by primary care professionals has significantly increased the population participation rate and the detection of neoplasms with respect to the usual colorectal cancer early detection programme protocol.

Randomized controlled dissemination study of community-to-clinic navigation to promote CRC screening: Study design and implications

INTRODUCTION

Regular screening facilitates early diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and reduction of CRC morbidity and mortality. Screening rates for minorities and low-income populations remain suboptimal. Provider referral for CRC screening is one of the strongest predictors of adherence, but referrals are unlikely among those who have no clinic home (common among poor and minority populations).

METHODS/STUDY DESIGN

This group randomized controlled study will test the effectiveness of an evidence based tailored messaging intervention in a community-to-clinic navigation context compared to no navigation. Multicultural, underinsured individuals from community sites will be randomized (by site) to receive CRC screening education only, or education plus navigation. In Phase I, those randomized to education plus navigation will be guided to make a clinic appointment to receive a provider referral for CRC screening. Patients attending clinic appointments will continue to receive navigation until screened (Phase II) regardless of initial arm assignment. We hypothesize that those receiving education plus navigation will be more likely to attend clinic appointments (H1) and show higher rates of screening (H2) compared to those receiving education only. Phase I group assignment will be used as a control variable in analysis of screening follow-through in Phase II. Costs per screening achieved will be evaluated for each condition and the RE-AIM framework will be used to examine dissemination results.

CONCLUSION

The novelty of our study design is the translational dissemination model that will allow us to assess the real-world application of an efficacious intervention previously tested in a randomized controlled trial.

Alerts in electronic medical records to promote a colorectal cancer screening programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care

BACKGROUND

Participation rates in colorectal cancer screening are below recommended European targets.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of an alert in primary care electronic medical records (EMRs) to increase individuals' participation in an organised, population-based colorectal cancer screening programme when compared with usual care.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care centres of Barcelona, Spain.

METHOD

Participants were males and females aged 50-69 years, who were invited to the first round of a screening programme based on the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) (n = 41 042), and their primary care professional. The randomisation unit was the physician cluster (n = 130) and patients were blinded to the study group. The control group followed usual care as per the colorectal cancer screening programme. In the intervention group, as well as usual care, an alert to health professionals (cluster level) to promote screening was introduced in the individual's primary care EMR for 1 year. The main outcome was colorectal cancer screening participation at individual participant level.

RESULTS

In total, 67 physicians and 21 619 patients (intervention group) and 63 physicians and 19 423 patients (control group) were randomised. In the intention-to-treat analysis screening participation was 44.1% and 42.2% respectively (odds ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97 to 1.20, P = 0.146). However, in the per-protocol analysis screening uptake in the intervention group showed a statistically significant increase, after adjusting for potential confounders (OR, 1.11; 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.22; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

The use of an alert in an individual's primary care EMR is associated with a statistically significant increased uptake of an organised, FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme in patients attending primary care centres.

Reinvitation to screening colonoscopy: a randomized-controlled trial of reminding letter and invitation to educational meeting on attendance in nonresponders to initial invitation to screening colonoscopy (REINVITE)

OBJECTIVES

The response rate to initial invitation to population-based primary screening colonoscopy within the NordICC trial (NCT 00883792) in Poland is around 50%. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a reinvitation letter and invitation to an educational intervention on participation in screening colonoscopy in nonresponders to initial invitation.

METHODS

Within the NordICC trial framework, individuals living in the region of Warsaw, who were drawn from Population Registries and assigned randomly to the screening group, received an invitation letter and a reminder with a prespecified screening colonoscopy appointment date. One thousand individuals, aged 55 to 64 years, who did not respond to both the invitation and the reminding letter were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the reinvitation group (REI) and the educational meeting group (MEET). The REI group was sent a reinvitation letter and reminder 6 and 3 weeks before the new colonoscopy appointment date, respectively. The MEET group was sent an invitation 6 weeks before an educational meeting date. Outcome measures were participation in screening colonoscopy within 6 months and response rate within 3 months from the date of reinvitation or invitation to an educational meeting.

RESULTS

The response rate and the participation rate in colonoscopy were statistically significantly higher in the REI group compared with the MEET group (16.5 vs. 4.3%; P<0.001 and 5.2 vs. 2.1%; P=0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A simple reinvitation letter results in a higher response rate and participation rate to screening colonoscopy than invitation to tailored educational meeting in nonresponders to previous invitations. (NCT01183156).

The impact of health information technology on cancer care across the continuum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Health information technology (HIT) has the potential to play a significant role in the management of cancer. The purpose of this review is to identify and examine empirical studies that investigate the impact of HIT in cancer care on different levels of the care continuum.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed in four academic databases. The authors used a three-step search process to identify 122 studies that met specific inclusion criteria. Next, a coding sheet was used to extract information from each included article to use in an analysis. Logistic regression was used to determine study-specific characteristics that were associated with positive findings.

RESULTS

Overall, 72.4% of published analyses reported a beneficial effect of HIT. Multivariate analysis found that the impact of HIT differs across the cancer continuum with studies targeting diagnosis and treatment being, respectively, 77 (P = .001) and 39 (P = .039) percentage points less likely to report a beneficial effect when compared to those targeting prevention. In addition, studies targeting HIT to patients were 31 percentage points less likely to find a beneficial effect than those targeting providers (P = .030). Lastly, studies assessing behavior change as an outcome were 41 percentage points less likely to find a beneficial effect (P = .006), while studies targeting decision making were 27 percentage points more likely to find a beneficial effect (P = .034).

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, HIT interventions seem to be more successful when targeting physicians, care in the prevention phase of the cancer continuum, and/or decision making. An agenda for future research is discussed.

A Systems Approach to Improving Tdap Immunization Within 5 Community-Based Family Practice Settings: Working Differently (and Better) by Transforming the Structure and Process of Care

OBJECTIVES

We examined how family medicine clinic physicians and staff worked in collaborative teams to implement an automated clinical reminder to improve tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) booster vaccine administration and documentation.

METHODS

A clinical reminder was developed at 5 University of Michigan family medicine clinics to identify patients 11 to 64 years old who were in need of the Tdap booster vaccine. Quality improvement cycles were used to improve clinic care processes. Immunization rates from 2008 to 2011 were compared with rates at 4 primary care control clinics.

RESULTS

Vaccination rates among eligible patients increased from 15.5% to 47.3% within the family medicine clinics and from 14.1% to 30.2% within the control clinics. After adjustment for covariates, family medicine patients had a higher probability of vaccination than control patients during each measurement period (0.17 vs 0.15 at baseline, 0.53 vs 0.22 during year 1, and 0.50 vs 0.30 during year 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Automated clinical reminders, when designed and implemented via a consensus-based framework that addresses the process of care, can dramatically improve provision of preventive health care.

Testing health information technology tools to facilitate health insurance support: a protocol for an effectiveness-implementation hybrid randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with gaps in health insurance coverage often defer or forgo cancer prevention services. These delays in cancer detection and diagnoses lead to higher rates of morbidity and mortality and increased costs. Recent advances in health information technology (HIT) create new opportunities to enhance insurance support services that reduce coverage gaps through automated processes applied in healthcare settings. This study will assess the implementation of insurance support HIT tools and their effectiveness at improving patients' insurance coverage continuity and cancer screening rates.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study uses a hybrid cluster-randomized design-a combined effectiveness and implementation trial-in community health centers (CHCs) in the USA. Eligible CHC clinic sites will be randomly assigned to one of two groups in the trial's implementation component: tools + basic training (Arm I) and tools + enhanced training + facilitation (Arm II). A propensity score-matched control group of clinics will be selected to assess the tools' effectiveness. Quantitative analyses of the tools' impact will use electronic health record and Medicaid data to assess effectiveness. Qualitative data will be collected to evaluate the implementation process, understand how the HIT tools are being used, and identify facilitators and barriers to their implementation and use.

DISCUSSION

This study will test the effectiveness of HIT tools to enhance insurance support in CHCs and will compare strategies for facilitating their implementation in "real-world" practice settings. Findings will inform further development and, if indicated, more widespread implementation of insurance support HIT tools.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial NTC02355262.

Physician counseling on colorectal cancer screening and receipt of screening among Latino patients

BACKGROUND

Latinos have lower rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and later stage diagnosis than Whites, which may be partially explained by physician communication factors.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed associations between patient-reported physician counseling regarding CRC screening and receipt of CRC screening among Latino primary care patients.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional telephone survey.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants of this study were Latino primary care patients 50 years of age or older, with one or more visits during the preceding year.

MAIN MEASURES

We developed patient-reported measures to assess whether physicians provided explanations of CRC risks and tests, elicited patients' barriers to CRC screening, were responsive to patients' concerns about screening, and encouraged patients to be screened. Outcomes were patient reports of receipt of endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) within recommended guidelines.

KEY RESULTS

Of 817 eligible patients contacted, 505 (62 %) completed the survey; mean age was 61 years (SD 8.4), 69 % were women, and 53 % had less than high school education. Forty-six percent reported obtaining endoscopy (with or without FOBT), 13 % reported FOBT only, and 41 % reported no CRC screening. In bivariate analyses, physician explanations, elicitation of barriers, responsiveness to concerns, and greater encouragement for screening were associated with receipt of endoscopy (p < 0.001), and explanations (p < 0.05) and encouragement (p < 0.001) were associated with FOBT. Adjusting for covariates, physician explanations (OR = 1.27; 95 % CI 1.03, 1.58) and greater physician encouragement (OR = 6.74; 95 % CI 3.57, 12.72) were associated with endoscopy; patients reporting quite a bit/a lot of physician encouragement had six times higher odds of obtaining the FOBT as those reporting none/a little encouragement (OR = 6.54; 95 % CI 2.76, 15.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Among primarily lower-socioeconomic status Latino patients, the degree to which patients perceived that physicians encouraged CRC screening was more strongly associated with screening than with providing risk information, eliciting barriers, and responding to their concerns about screening.

Randomized controlled trial of storytelling compared to a personal risk tool intervention on colorectal cancer screening in low-income patients

PURPOSE

Screening rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) lag for low-income, minority populations, contributing to poorer survival rates. A model of storytelling as culture-centric health promotion was tested for promoting CRC screening.

DESIGN

A two-group parallel randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Primary care, safety-net clinics.

SUBJECTS

Low-income patients due for CRC screening, ages 50 to 75 years, speaking English or Spanish.

INTERVENTION

Patients were exposed to either a video created from personal stories composited into a drama about "Papa" receiving CRC screening, or an instrument estimating level of personal cancer risk. Patients received a health care provider referral for CRC screening and were followed up for 3 months to document adherence.

MEASURES

Behavioral factors related to the narrative model (identification and engagement) and theory of planned behavior.

ANALYSIS

Main effects of the interventions on screening were tested, controlling for attrition factors, and demographic factor associations were assessed. Path analysis with model variables was used to test the direct effects and multiple mediator models.

RESULTS

Main effects on CRC screening (roughly half stool-based tests, half colonoscopy) did not indicate significant differences (37% and 42% screened for storytelling and risk-based messages, respectively; n = 539; 33.6% male; 62% Hispanic). Factors positively associated with CRC screening included being female, Hispanic, married or living with a partner, speaking Spanish, having a primary care provider, lower income, and no health insurance. Engagement, working through positive attitudes toward the behavior, predicted CRC screening.

CONCLUSION

A storytelling and a personalized risk-tool intervention achieved similar levels of screening among unscreened/underscreened, low-income patients. Factors usually associated with lower rates of screening (e.g., no insurance, being Hispanic) were related to more adherence. Both interventions' engagement factor facilitated positive attitudes about CRC screening associated with behavior change.

An early evaluation of implementation of brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in the US Veterans Health Administration

AIMS

The US Veterans Health Administration [Veterans Affairs (VA)] used performance measures and electronic clinical reminders to implement brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. We evaluated whether documented brief intervention was associated with subsequent changes in drinking during early implementation.

DESIGN

Observational, retrospective cohort study using secondary clinical and administrative data.

SETTING

Thirty VA facilities.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use [Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C ≥ 5)] in the 6 months after the brief intervention performance measure (n = 22 214) and had follow-up screening 9-15 months later (n = 6210; 28%).

MEASUREMENTS

Multi-level logistic regression estimated the adjusted prevalence of resolution of unhealthy alcohol use (follow-up AUDIT-C <5 with ≥2 point reduction) for patients with and without documented brief intervention (documented advice to reduce or abstain from drinking).

FINDINGS

Among 6210 patients with follow-up alcohol screening, 1751 (28%) had brief intervention and 2922 (47%) resolved unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up. Patients with documented brief intervention were older and more likely to have other substance use disorders, mental health conditions, poor health and more severe unhealthy alcohol use than those without (P-values < 0.05). Adjusted prevalences of resolution were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 42-52%] and 48% (95% CI = 42-54%) for patients with and without documented brief intervention, respectively (P = 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

During early implementation of brief intervention in the US Veterans Health Administration, documented brief intervention was not associated with subsequent changes in drinking among outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use and repeat alcohol screening.

Can an alert in primary care electronic medical records increase participation in a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer? COLO-ALERT, a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is an important public health problem in Spain. Over the last decade, several regions have carried out screening programmes, but population participation rates remain below recommended European goals. Reminders on electronic medical records have been identified as a low-cost and high-reach strategy to increase participation. Further knowledge is needed about their effect in a population-based screening programme. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an electronic reminder to promote the participation in a population-based colorectal cancer screening programme. Secondary aims are to learn population's reasons for refusing to take part in the screening programme and to find out the health professionals' opinion about the official programme implementation and on the new computerised tool.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a parallel randomised trial with a cross-sectional second stage.

PARTICIPANTS

all the invited subjects to participate in the public colorectal cancer screening programme that includes men and women aged between 50-69, allocated to the eleven primary care centres of the study and all their health professionals. The randomisation unit will be the primary care physician. The intervention will consist of activating an electronic reminder, in the patient's electronic medical record, in order to promote colorectal cancer screening, during a synchronous medical appointment, throughout the year that the intervention takes place. A comparison of the screening rates will then take place, using the faecal occult blood test of the patients from the control and the intervention groups. We will also take a questionnaire to know the opinions of the health professionals. The main outcome is the screening status at the end of the study. Data will be analysed with an intention-to-treat approach.

DISCUSSION

We expect that the introduction of specific reminders in electronic medical records, as a tool to facilitate and encourage direct referral by physicians and nurse practitioners to perform colorectal cancer screening will mean an increase in participation of the target population. The introduction of this new software tool will have good acceptance and increase compliance with recommendations from health professionals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT01877018.

Implementation of an electronic medical record does not change delivery of preventive care for HIV-positive patients

PURPOSE

This study sought to determine the impact that an electronic medical record (EMR) had on the provision of preventive health measures - including obtaining serologies for viral hepatitis and administering vaccinations to non-immune patients - to HIV patients at a hospital-based clinic.

METHODS

Using a pre-post study design, we compared rates of preventive health delivery to HIV patients at an outpatient clinic during the use of a paper medical record (PMR) and after implementation of an EMR. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted at two time points: 12-16 months prior to and 24 months following EMR implementation. The records of 160 active patients were randomly selected for review during both time periods.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the PMR and EMR samples with regard to the proportion of patients who had hepatitis A (83% in PMR group; 77% in EMR) and hepatitis C (94% in both groups) serologies measured or the proportion of eligible patients who were given hepatitis vaccinations. Slightly fewer patients had a serology for hepatitis B measured in the EMR sample.

CONCLUSIONS

As EMR implementation expands, it is important to evaluate the effects that EMRs have on patient outcomes, including preventive health provision. Our study showed that after implementation of an EMR, the provision of most preventive care measures did not improve. This finding is in agreement with many published studies. Some studies have found positive effects from EMRs that may be attributable to specific aspects of EMRs. Further study of the effect of specific EMR attributes on health care outcomes is needed.

Perceived barriers and facilitators of using a Web-based interactive decision aid for colorectal cancer screening in community practice settings: findings from focus groups with primary care clinicians and medical office staff

BACKGROUND

Information is lacking about the capacity of those working in community practice settings to utilize health information technology for colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE

To address this gap we asked those working in community practice settings to share their perspectives about how the implementation of a Web-based patient-led decision aid might affect patient-clinician conversations about colorectal cancer screening and the day-to-day clinical workflow.

METHODS

Five focus groups in five community practice settings were conducted with 8 physicians, 1 physician assistant, and 18 clinic staff. Focus groups were organized using a semistructured discussion guide designed to identify factors that mediate and impede the use of a Web-based decision aid intended to clarify patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening and to trigger shared decision making during the clinical encounter.

RESULTS

All physicians, the physician assistant, and 8 of the 18 clinic staff were active participants in the focus groups. Clinician and staff participants from each setting reported a belief that the Web-based patient-led decision aid could be an informative and educational tool; in all but one setting participants reported a readiness to recommend the tool to patients. The exception related to clinicians from one clinic who described a preference for patients having fewer screening choices, noting that a colonoscopy was the preferred screening modality for patients in their clinic. Perceived barriers to utilizing the Web-based decision aid included patients' lack of Internet access or low computer literacy, and potential impediments to the clinics' daily workflow. Expanding patients' use of an online decision aid that is both easy to access and understand and that is utilized by patients outside of the office visit was described as a potentially efficient means for soliciting patients' screening preferences. Participants described that a system to link the online decision aid to a computerized reminder system could promote a better understanding of patients' screening preferences, though some expressed concern that such a system could be difficult to keep up and running.

CONCLUSIONS

Community practice clinicians and staff perceived the Web-based decision aid technology as promising but raised questions as to how the technology and resultant information would be integrated into their daily practice workflow. Additional research investigating how to best implement online decision aids should be conducted prior to the widespread adoption of such technology so as to maximize the benefits of the technology while minimizing workflow disruptions.

Use of health information technology to reduce diagnostic errors

BACKGROUND

Health information technology (HIT) systems have the potential to reduce delayed, missed or incorrect diagnoses. We describe and classify the current state of diagnostic HIT and identify future research directions.

METHODS

A multi-pronged literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, backwards and forwards reference searches and contributions from domain experts. We included HIT systems evaluated in clinical and experimental settings as well as previous reviews, and excluded radiology computer-aided diagnosis, monitor alerts and alarms, and studies focused on disease staging and prognosis. Articles were organised within a conceptual framework of the diagnostic process and areas requiring further investigation were identified.

RESULTS

HIT approaches, tools and algorithms were identified and organised into 10 categories related to those assisting: (1) information gathering; (2) information organisation and display; (3) differential diagnosis generation; (4) weighing of diagnoses; (5) generation of diagnostic plan; (6) access to diagnostic reference information; (7) facilitating follow-up; (8) screening for early detection in asymptomatic patients; (9) collaborative diagnosis; and (10) facilitating diagnostic feedback to clinicians. We found many studies characterising potential interventions, but relatively few evaluating the interventions in actual clinical settings and even fewer demonstrating clinical impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic HIT research is still in its early stages with few demonstrations of measurable clinical impact. Future efforts need to focus on: (1) improving methods and criteria for measurement of the diagnostic process using electronic data; (2) better usability and interfaces in electronic health records; (3) more meaningful incorporation of evidence-based diagnostic protocols within clinical workflows; and (4) systematic feedback of diagnostic performance.

Adherence to physician recommendation to colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy among Hispanics

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among Hispanics in the United States (US), yet the use of CRC screening is low in this population. Physician recommendation has consistently shown to improve CRC screening.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the characteristics of Hispanic patients who adhere or do not adhere to their physician's recommendation to have a screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study featuring face-to-face interviews by culturally matched interviewers was conducted in primary healthcare clinics and community centers in New York City.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred Hispanic men and women aged 50 or older, at average risk for CRC, were interviewed. Two hundred and eighty (70%) reported receipt of a physician's recommendation for screening colonoscopy and are included in this study.

MAIN MEASURES

Dependent variable: self report of having had screening colonoscopy.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

sociodemographics, healthcare and health promotion factors.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 280 participants, 25% did not adhere to their physician's recommendation. Factors found to be associated with non-adherence were younger age, being born in the US, preference for completing interviews in English, higher acculturation, and greater reported fear of colonoscopy testing. The source of colonoscopy recommendation (whether it came from their usual healthcare provider or not, and whether it occurred in a community or academic healthcare facility) for CRC screening was not associated with adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that potentially identifiable subgroups of Hispanics may be less likely to follow their physician recommendation to have a screening colonoscopy and thus may decrease their likelihood of an early diagnosis and prompt treatment. Raising physicians' awareness to such patients' characteristics could help them anticipate patients who may be less adherent and who may need additional encouragement to undergo screening colonoscopy.

Effective interventions to facilitate the uptake of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening: an implementation guideline

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. Several high-quality systematic reviews and practice guidelines exist to inform the most effective screening options. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. We developed an implementation guideline to answer the question: What interventions have been shown to increase the uptake of cancer screening by individuals, specifically for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers?

METHODS

A guideline panel was established as part of Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-based Care, and a systematic review of the published literature was conducted. It yielded three foundational systematic reviews and an existing guidance document. We conducted updates of these reviews and searched the literature published between 2004 and 2010. A draft guideline was written that went through two rounds of review. Revisions were made resulting in a final set of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Sixty-six new studies reflecting 74 comparisons met eligibility criteria. They were generally of poor to moderate quality. Using these and the foundational documents, the panel developed a draft guideline. The draft report was well received in the two rounds of review with mean quality scores above four (on a five-point scale) for each of the items. For most of the interventions considered, there was insufficient evidence to support or refute their effectiveness. However, client reminders, reduction of structural barriers, and provision of provider assessment and feedback were recommended interventions to increase screening for at least two of three cancer sites studied. The final guidelines also provide advice on how the recommendations can be used and future areas for research.

CONCLUSION

Using established guideline development methodologies and the AGREE II as our methodological frameworks, we developed an implementation guideline to advise on interventions to increase the rate of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. While advancements have been made in these areas of implementation science, more investigations are warranted.

What implementation interventions increase cancer screening rates? a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. As part of a larger agenda to create an implementation guideline, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate interventions designed to increase the rate of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The interventions considered were: client reminders, client incentives, mass media, small media, group education, one-on-one education, reduction in structural barriers, reduction in out-of-pocket costs, provider assessment and feedback interventions, and provider incentives. Our primary outcome, screening completion, was calculated as the overall median post-intervention absolute percentage point (PP) change in completed screening tests.

METHODS

Our first step was to conduct an iterative scoping review in the research area. This yielded three relevant high-quality systematic reviews. Serving as our evidentiary foundation, we conducted a formal update. Randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized controlled trials, published between 2004 and 2010, were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCHinfo.

RESULTS

The update yielded 66 studies new eligible studies with 74 comparisons. The new studies ranged considerably in quality. Client reminders, small media, and provider audit and feedback appear to be effective interventions to increase the uptake of screening for three cancers. One-on-one education and reduction of structural barriers also appears effective, but their roles with CRC and cervical screening, respectively, are less established. More study is required to assess client incentives, mass media, group education, reduction of out-of-pocket costs, and provider incentive interventions.

CONCLUSION

The new evidence generally aligns with the evidence and conclusions from the original systematic reviews. This review served as the evidentiary foundation for an implementation guideline. Poor reporting, lack of precision and consistency in defining operational elements, and insufficient consideration of context and differences among populations are areas for additional research.

Outside the box: will information technology be a viable intervention to improve the quality of cancer care?

The use of health information technology (IT) to resolve the crisis in communication inherent within the fragmented service environment of medical care in the United States is a strategic priority for the Department of Health and Human Services. Yet the deployment of health IT alone is not sufficient to improve quality in health service delivery; what is needed is a human factors approach designed to optimize the balance between health-care users, health-care providers, policies, procedures, and technologies. An evaluation of interface issues between primary and specialist care related to cancer reveals opportunities for human factors improvement along the cancer care continuum. Applications that emphasize cognitive support for prevention recommendations and that encourage patient engagement can help create a coordinated health-care environment conducive to cancer prevention and early detection. An emphasis on reliability, transparency, and accountability can help improve the coordination of activities among multiple service providers during diagnosis and treatment. A switch in emphasis from a transaction-based approach to one emphasizing long-term support for healing relationships should help improve patient outcomes during cancer survivorship and end-of-life care. Across the entire continuum of care, an emphasis on "meaningful use" of health IT-rather than on IT as an endpoint-should help put cancer on a path toward substantive continuous quality improvement. The accompanying research questions will focus on reducing the variance between the social and technical subsystems as IT is used to improve patient outcomes across the interfaces of care.