Offering patients a choice for colorectal cancer screening: a quality improvement pilot study in a quality circle of primary care physicians

Association between the colorectal cancer screening status of primary care physicians and their patients: Evidence from the Swiss Sentinella practice-based research network

Swiss health insurance reimburses screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) with either colonoscopy or fecal occult blood test (FOBT). Studies have documented the association between a physician's personal preventive health practices and the practices they recommend to their patients. We explored the association between CRC testing status of primary care physicians (PCP) and the testing rate among their patients. From May 2017 to September 2017, we invited 129 PCP who belonged to the Swiss Sentinella Network to disclose their CRC test status and whether they had been tested with colonoscopy or FOBT/other methods. Each participating PCP collected demographic data and CRC testing status from 40 consecutive 50- to 75-year-old patients. We analyzed data from 69 (54%) PCP 50 years or older and 2623 patients. Most PCP were men (81%); 75% were tested for CRC (67% with colonoscopy and 9% with FOBT). Mean patient age was 63; 50% were women; 43% had been tested for CRC (38%, 1000/2623 with colonoscopy and 5%, 131/2623, with FOBT or other non-endoscopic test). In multivariate adjusted regression models that clustered patients by PCP, the proportion of patients tested for CRC was higher among PCP tested for CRC than among PCP not tested (47% vs 32%; OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.85). Since PCP CRC testing status is associated with their patients CRC testing rates, it informs future interventions that will alert PCPs to the influence of their health decisions and motivate them to further incorporate the values and preferences of their patients in their practice.

Undertaking general practice quality improvement to improve cancer screening - a thematic analysis of provider experiences

Background

Cancer is a major cause of illness and death, and its incidence and mortality can be reduced through effective screening. In order to improve below target screening rates in one region of Australia, the local Primary Health Network supported local general practices to implement a range of quality improvement initiatives.

Methods

We used a qualitative approach and interviewed 18 general practice staff and five Primary Health Network staff and contractors to understand their experiences with these quality improvement initiatives.

Results

In a thematic analysis, we identified four key themes related to program set-up and implementation; patient and community education and promotion; engaging patients and communities in screening; and general practice enhancement. Program roles were clear and understood, and the program received strong oversight and support. Practice staff felt supported and motivated. Information Technology was a challenge for many practices often requiring tailored assistance. Education provided by practices facilitated patient empowerment but practice staff noted difficulties engaging patients in screening. Practices were enhanced though strong leadership and teamwork and practice learning activities.

Conclusions

The tailored evidence-based quality improvement initiatives were considered effective in supporting general practices to increase their cancer screening. Key facilitators reported by participants included use of Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, enhanced data entry and audit capacity, effective recall and reminder systems and maintaining staff motivation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01581-y.

Healthcare professionals' behaviour regarding the implementation of shared decision-making in screening programmes: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To explore the barriers to and facilitators of healthcare professionals' implementation of SDM regarding screening programmes.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINHAL, and PsyscInfo. The barriers and facilitators identified were classified into three factors based on their origin: patients, healthcare system performance, and healthcare professionals themselves.

RESULTS

Eight studies were selected: seven related to cancer screening. The most significant facilitators were literacy and interest in active participation, both of which have their origins in patients. The most significant barriers identified for the first time in a systematic review were legal conflict, lack of remuneration and lack of flexibility in clinical guidelines in screening programmes.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that there are differences between barriers and facilitators for SDM when it is applied in the context of healthy people who perform preventive activities, particularly screening, in contrast to general medical consultation contexts.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The authors suggest that to advance in the practice of SDM, we need to develop and disseminate training documents. Further, SDM should be incorporated into clinical guidelines. There should be more studies focusing on healthcare professionals' behaviour within the context of the uncertainty of screening programmes.

Implementation of a stereotactic body radiotherapy program for unresectable pancreatic cancer in an integrated community academic radiation oncology satellite network

•

PDSA methodology was used to implement a pancreas SBRT in an academic satellite network.

•

Oncologic outcomes were favorable with no serious adverse events.

•

This technical note provides groundwork for safe establishment of SBRT pancreas programs.

With increasing interest in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for unresectable pancreatic cancer, quality improvement (QI) initiatives to develop integrated clinical workflows are crucial to ensure quality assurance (QA) when introducing this challenging technique into radiation practices.

Materials/Methods: In 2017, we used the Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) QI methodology to implement a new pancreas SBRT program in an integrated community radiation oncology satellite. A unified integrated information technology infrastructure was used to virtually integrate the planned workflow into the community radiation oncology satellite network (P – Plan/D – Do). This workflow included multiple prospective quality assurance (QA) measures including multidisciplinary evaluation, prospective scrutiny of radiation target delineation, prospective radiation plan evaluation, and monitoring of patient outcomes. Institutional review board approval was obtained to retrospectively study and report outcomes of patients treated in this program (S – Study).

Results:

There were 12 consecutive patients identified who were treated in this program from 2017 to 2020 with a median follow-up of 27 months. The median survival was 13 months, median local failure free survival was 12 months and median progression free survival was 6 months from SBRT. There were no acute or late Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) version 5 toxicities ≥ Grade 3.

Conclusion:

We report the successful implementation of a community pancreas SBRT program involving multiple prospective QA measures, providing the groundwork to safely expand access to pancreas SBRT in our community satellite network (A – Act).