Evaluation of claims, medical records, and self-report for measuring fecal occult blood testing among medicare enrollees in fee for service

Using the SEER-Medicare Data to Assess Incident Chronic Myeloid Leukemia and Bladder Cancer Cases Missed by Cancer Registries

The growing use of oral systemic therapies and transition of some cancer treatments to the outpatient setting makes capturing all cancer case patients more difficult. We aim to develop algorithms to identify potentially missed incident case patients and estimate impact on incidence rates. We reviewed claims from SEER-Medicare 5% noncancer control patient sample to identify potentially missed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and bladder case patients based on diagnosis codes, cancer-related treatments, and oncology consultations. Observed rates of definite missed CML and definite and probable missed bladder case patients were calculated and the impact of missed case patients of these two cancers on SEER 65+ incidence rates were estimated. From 2008 to 2015, the algorithm estimated 781 definite CML case patients missed, increasing the number by 10.7%. From 2007 to 2015, the algorithm estimated 4629 definite and 5772 probable bladder case patients missed, increasing the number by 3.8% to 8.1%. Our algorithms offer potential methods for identifying missed case patients and validating the completeness of cancer registries.

Random survival forests using linked data to measure illness burden among individuals before or after a cancer diagnosis: Development and internal validation of the SEER-CAHPS illness burden index

PURPOSE

To develop and internally validate an illness burden index among Medicare beneficiaries before or after a cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

Data source: SEER-CAHPS, linking Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry, Medicare enrollment and claims, and Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (Medicare CAHPS) survey data providing self-reported sociodemographic, health, and functional status information. To generate a score for everyone in the dataset, we tabulated 4 groups within each annual subsample (2007-2013): 1) Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries or 2) Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries, surveyed before cancer diagnosis; 3) MA beneficiaries or 4) Medicare FFS beneficiaries surveyed after diagnosis. Random survival forests (RSFs) predicted 12-month all-cause mortality and drew predictor variables (mean per subsample = 44) from 8 domains: sociodemographic, cancer-specific, health status, chronic conditions, healthcare utilization, activity limitations, proxy, and location-based factors. Roughly two-thirds of the sample was held out for algorithm training. Error rates based on the validation ("out-of-bag," OOB) samples reflected the correctly classified percentage. Illness burden scores represented predicted cumulative mortality hazard.

RESULTS

The sample included 116,735 Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, of whom 73 % were surveyed after their cancer diagnosis; overall mean mortality rate in the 12 months after survey response was 6%. SEER-CAHPS Illness Burden Index (SCIBI) scores were positively skewed (median range: 0.29 [MA, pre-diagnosis] to 2.85 [FFS, post-diagnosis]; mean range: 2.08 [MA, pre-diagnosis] to 4.88 [MA, post-diagnosis]). The highest decile of the distribution had a 51 % mortality rate (range: 29-71 %); the bottom decile had a 1% mortality rate (range: 0-2 %). The error rate was 20 % overall (range: 9% [among FFS enrollees surveyed after diagnosis] to 36 % [MA enrollees surveyed before diagnosis]).

CONCLUSIONS

This new morbidity measure for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer may be useful to future SEER-CAHPS users who wish to adjust for comorbidity.

Is there an agreement between self-reported medical diagnosis in the CARTaGENE cohort and the Québec administrative health databases?

BACKGROUND

Population health studies often use existing databases that are not necessarily constituted for research purposes. The question arises as to whether different data sources such as in administrative health data (AHD) and self-report questionnaires are equivalent and lead to similar information.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to assess the level of agreement between self-reported medical conditions and medical diagnosis captured in AHD. A secondary objective was to identify predictors of agreement among medical conditions between the two data sources. Therefore, the purposes of the study were to explore the extent to which these two methods of commonly used public health data collection provide concordant records and identify the main predictors of statistical variations.

METHODS

Data were extracted from CARTaGENE, a population-based cohort in Québec, Canada, which was linked to the provincial health insurance records of the same individuals, namely the MED-ÉCHO database from the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ) and the fee-for-service billing records provided by the physician, for the time period 1998-2012. Agreement statistics (kappa coefficient) along with sensitivity, specificity and predictive positive value were calculated for 19 chronic conditions and 12 types of cancers. Logistic regressions were used to identify predictors of concordance between self-report and AHD from significant covariates (sex, age groups, education, region, income, heavy utilization of health care system and Charlson comorbidity index).

RESULTS

Agreement between self-reported data and AHD across diseases ranged from kappa of 0.09 for chronic renal failure to 0.86 for type 2 diabetes. Sensitivity of self-reported data was higher than 50% for 14 out of the 31 medical conditions studied, especially for myocardial infarction (88.62%), breast cancer (86.28%), and diabetes (85.06%). Specificity was generally high with a minimum value of 89.70%. Lower concordance between data sources was observed for higher frequency of health care utilization and higher comorbidity scores.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there was moderate agreement between the two data sources but important variations were found depending on the type of disease. This suggests that CARTaGENE's participants were generally able to correctly identify the kind of diseases they suffer from, with some exceptions. These results may help researchers choose adequate data sources according to specific study objectives. These results also suggest that Québec's AHD seem to underestimate the prevalence of some chronic conditions, which might result in inaccurate estimates of morbidity with consequences for public health surveillance.

Evaluating Lung Cancer Screening Uptake, Outcomes, and Costs in the United States: Challenges With Existing Data and Recommendations for Improvement

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported substantial reduction in lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals screened annually with low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT). As a result, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued a B recommendation for annual LDCT in high-risk individuals, which requires private insurers to cover it without cost-sharing. The Medicare program also covers LDCT for high-risk beneficiaries without cost-sharing. However, the NLST findings may not be generalizable to the community setting because of differences in patients, providers, and practices participating in the NLST. Thus, examining uptake of LDCT screening in community practice is critical, as is evaluating the immediate and downstream outcomes of screening, including false-positive scans, follow-up examinations and adverse events, costs, stage of disease at diagnosis, and survival. This commentary presents an overview of the landscape of the data resources currently available to evaluate the uptake, outcomes, and costs of LDCT screening in the United States. We describe the strengths and limitations of existing data sources, including administrative databases, surveys, and registries. Thereafter, we provide recommendations for improving the data infrastructure pertaining to three overarching research areas: receipt of guideline-consistent screening and follow-up, weighing benefits and harms of screening, and costs of screening.

Effects of the Affordable Care Act on the Receipt of Colonoscopies among the Insured Elderly

Background: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) waived deductibles and eliminated coinsurance for colonoscopies for Medicare beneficiaries beginning in January 1, 2011. This study investigated the effect of the ACA’s directive to remove the financial barriers on the receipt of colonoscopies among the elderly insured, who are predominantly covered by Medicare. Methods: Data from the 2008–2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) were used to examine the receipt of colonoscopies in two years prior to the implementation of the ACA (2008 and 2010) and three years after the change (2012, 2014, and 2016). Multivariate logistic regressions were estimated to examine the change in colonoscopy use before and after the introduction of the ACA, adjusting for patient characteristics and availability of health care providers in the geographic region. Results: Of 349,899 eligible elderly insured in the age group 65 to 75 years, 236,275 (67.2%) had received a colonoscopy in the previous ten years. The receipt of colonoscopies increased from 63.5% in pre-ACA years to 69.2% in the post-ACA years (p < 0.001). Compared with the pre-ACA period, the odds ratio of colonoscopy uptake in post-ACA years was 1.15 (95% CI = 1.08–1.22). Conclusions: A statistically significant increase in colonoscopy use was observed in the post-ACA years. However, achieving the target coverage rate of 80% will require additional interventions to encourage higher levels of screenings.

Screening colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer screening options, but their relative effectiveness needs clarification. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study within the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were subjects age 70-85 years in the SEER-Medicare database diagnosed with CRC during 2004-2013. Up to 3 controls were matched to each case by birth year, sex, race, and SEER region. Receipt of screening colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for a history of screening in cases vs. controls. We conducted secondary analyses by sex, race, endoscopist characteristics, and with varying timing and duration of the look-back period.

RESULTS

Receipt of screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 59% (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.39, 0.43) and 22% reduction (OR 0.78, 95%CI 0.67, 0.92) in colorectal cancer incidence, respectively. Colonoscopy was associated with greater reduction in the distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.20, 0.24) than proximal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.59, 0.66). Sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 52% reduction in distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.37, 0.63), but with no reduction in proximal colorectal cancer incidence. These associations were stronger in men than in women. No differences by race or endoscopist characteristics were observed.

CONCLUSION

Both screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy were associated with reductions in overall colorectal cancer incidence, with a greater magnitude of reduction observed with colonoscopy.

Qualitative Assessment of Washington State Medicaid Health Plan Readiness to Implement Systems-Based Approaches to Colorectal Cancer Screening

Implementation of population-based colorectal cancer screening programs by Medicaid health plans could address colorectal cancer screening disparities. Our objective is to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation of a population-based colorectal cancer screening program by Washington State Medicaid health plans. We conducted semi-structured interviews with leadership from 2 statewide and 3 national Medicaid plans. We organized the interview questions around the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We analyzed interview transcripts, guided by directed content analysis, and identified facilitators and barriers to Medicaid health plan implementation of population-based colorectal cancer screening programs. Robust health plan (inner setting) quality improvement infrastructures were facilitators. Lack of statewide Medicaid policy incentives (external setting) to increase colorectal cancer screening were barriers to potential implementation. Efforts to address identified barriers through local and national policies and statewide data sharing efforts may support Medicaid health plan implementation of population-based colorectal cancer screening programs.

Screening flexible sigmoidoscopy versus colonoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer mortality

PURPOSE

Colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, but their relative effectiveness is unclear. We sought to evaluate the ability of each of these two modalities to reduce CRC mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were persons aged 70-85 years who died of CRC and were matched to up to three non-CRC controls. Receipt of endoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims and endoscopy indication assigned using a validated algorithm. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the association between screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy and CRC mortality. We conducted secondary analyses by race, sex, and endoscopist characteristics, and with varying duration of the look-back period.

RESULTS

In the initial analysis using all available look-back years, screening flexible sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 35% reduction in CRC mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48, 0.89), while screening colonoscopy was associated with a 74% reduction (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.23, 0.30). Sigmoidoscopy was not associated with any reduction in proximal CRC mortality. The association between colonoscopy and reduced CRC mortality was stronger in the distal than the proximal colon. Results were similar in analyses using a 5-year look-back period.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening colonoscopy was associated with greater reductions in CRC mortality than screening sigmoidoscopy, and with a greater reduction in the distal than the proximal colon. These results provide additional information on the relative benefits of screening for CRC with sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.

Geographic and population-level disparities in colorectal cancer testing: A multilevel analysis of Medicaid and commercial claims data

Morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be attenuated through guideline concordant screening and intervention. This study used Medicaid and commercial claims data to examine individual and geographic factors associated with CRC testing rates in one state (Oregon). A total of 64,711 beneficiaries (4516 Medicaid; 60,195 Commercial) became newly age-eligible for CRC screening and met inclusion criteria (e.g., continuously enrolled, no prior history) during the study period (January 2010-December 2013). We estimated multilevel models to examine predictors for CRC testing, including individual (e.g., gender, insurance, rurality, access to care, distance to endoscopy facility) and geographic factors at the county level (e.g., poverty, uninsurance). Despite insurance coverage, only two out of five (42%) beneficiaries had evidence of CRC testing during the four year study window. CRC testing varied from 22.4% to 46.8% across Oregon's 36 counties; counties with higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation had lower levels of testing. After controlling for age, beneficiaries had greater odds of receiving CRC testing if they were female (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08), commercially insured, or urban residents (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.21). Accessing primary care (OR 2.47, 95% CI 2.37-2.57), but not distance to endoscopy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92-1.03) was associated with testing. CRC testing in newly age-eligible Medicaid and commercial members remains markedly low. Disparities exist by gender, geographic residence, insurance coverage, and access to primary care. Work remains to increase CRC testing to acceptable levels, and to select and implement interventions targeting the counties and populations in greatest need.

Assessing the impact of colonoscopy complications on use of colonoscopy among primary care physicians and other connected physicians: an observational study of older Americans

OBJECTIVES

Psychological biases can distort treatment decision-making. The availability heuristic is one such bias, wherein events that are recent, vivid or easily imagined are readily 'available' to memory and are therefore judged more likely to occur than expected based on epidemiological data. We assessed if the occurrence of a serious colonoscopy complication for a primary care physician's patient influenced colonoscopy rates for the physician's other patients.

DESIGN

Longitudinal study with time-varying exposure variables.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Individuals living in 51 hospital referral regions across the USA identified based on enrolment in fee-for-service Medicare during 2005-2010. We assigned patients to a primary care physician based on office visits during the prior 2 years.

EXPOSURES

For each physician in each month, we calculated the proportion of patients assigned to them who had a colonoscopy. We identified two serious complications of which the primary care provider would very likely be aware: gastrointestinal bleed or perforation leading to hospitalisation or death within 14 days of colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We employed Poisson regression models including physician fixed effects to assess the change in number of colonoscopies in the four quarters following an adverse colonoscopy event.

RESULTS

We identified 5 360 191 patients assigned to 30 704 physicians. 4864 physicians (16%) had at least one patient with an adverse event. The estimated change in the quarterly number of colonoscopies among physicians' patients was significantly lower in quarter 2 following an adverse colonoscopy event (change=-2.1% (95% CI -3.4 to -0.8%)), before returning to the rate expected in the absence of an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Having a patient experience a serious adverse colonoscopy event was associated with a small and temporary decline in colonoscopy rates among a physician's other patients. This finding provides empirical evidence for the influence of notable adverse events on care, possibly due to the availability heuristic.

Multilevel predictors of colorectal cancer testing modality among publicly and privately insured people turning 50

Understanding multilevel predictors of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test modality can help inform screening program design and implementation. We used North Carolina Medicare, Medicaid, and private, commercially available, health plan insurance claims data from 2003 to 2008 to ascertain CRC test modality among people who received CRC screening around their 50th birthday, when guidelines recommend that screening should commence for normal risk individuals. We ascertained receipt of colonoscopy, fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) from billing codes. Person-level and county-level contextual variables were included in multilevel random intercepts models to understand predictors of CRC test modality, stratified by insurance type. Of 12,570 publicly-insured persons turning 50 during the study period who received CRC testing, 57% received colonoscopy, whereas 43% received FOBT/FIT, with significant regional variation. In multivariable models, females with public insurance had lower odds of colonoscopy than males (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68; p < 0.05). Of 56,151 privately-insured persons turning 50 years old who received CRC testing, 42% received colonoscopy, whereas 58% received FOBT/FIT, with significant regional variation. In multivariable models, females with private insurance had lower odds of colonoscopy than males (OR = 0.43; p < 0.05). People living 10-15 miles away from endoscopy facilities also had lower odds of colonoscopy than those living within 5 miles (OR = 0.91; p < 0.05). Both colonoscopy and FOBT/FIT are widely used in North Carolina among insured persons newly age-eligible for screening. The high level of FOBT/FIT use among privately insured persons and women suggests that renewed emphasis on FOBT/FIT as a viable screening alternative to colonoscopy may be important.

Agreement between self-reported and registered colorectal cancer screening: a meta-analysis

This random-effects meta-analysis investigates the accuracy of self-reported colorectal cancer screening history as a function of screening mode (colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, faecal occult blood testing - FOBT, double-contrast barium enema - DCBE) and survey mode (written, telephone, face-to-face). Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. Medical record data were used as reference. We included 23 studies comprising 11,592 subjects. Colonoscopy yielded higher AUC [0.948, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.918, 0.968] than flexible sigmoidoscopy (0.883, 95% CI = 0.849, 0.911) and FOBT (0.869, 95% CI = 0.833, 0.898). Colonoscopy showed the highest sensitivity (0.888, 95% CI = 0.835, 0.931), whereas specificity was comparable between screening modes (ranging from 0.802 for FOBT to 0.904 for DCBE). AUC was not significantly different between survey modes. Prevalence of screening history correlated positively with sensitivity and negatively with specificity, possibly because of errors in the medical records. In conclusion, the accuracy of self-reported cancer screening is generally moderate, and higher for colonoscopy than for sigmoidoscopy and FOBT.

Health literacy and cancer screening: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate published evidence about health literacy and cancer screening.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched for English language articles measuring health literacy and cancer screening published in 1990-2011. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were independently reviewed by two investigators using a standardized data abstraction form. Abstracts (n=932) were reviewed and full text retrieved for 83 articles. Ten articles with 14 comparisons of health literacy and cancer screening according to recommended medical guidelines were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Most articles measured health literacy using the S-TOFHLA instrument and documented cancer screening by self-report. There is a trend for an association of inadequate health literacy and lower cancer screening rates, however, the evidence is mixed and limited by study design and measurement issues.

CONCLUSION

A patient's health literacy may be a contributing factor to being within recommended cancer screening guidelines.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future research should: be conducted using validated health literacy instruments; describe the population included in the study; document cancer screening test completion according to recommended guidelines; verify the completion of cancer screening tests by medical record review; adjust for confounding factors; and report effect size of the association of health literacy and cancer screening.

Decision Aid to Technologically Enhance Shared decision making (DATES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Clinicians face challenges in promoting colorectal cancer screening due to multiple competing demands. A decision aid that clarifies patient preferences and improves decision quality can aid shared decision making and be effective at increasing colorectal cancer screening rates. However, exactly how such an intervention improves shared decision making is unclear. This study, funded by the National Cancer Institute, seeks to provide detailed understanding of how an interactive decision aid that elicits patient's risks and preferences impacts patient-clinician communication and shared decision making, and ultimately colorectal cancer screening adherence.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a two-armed single-blinded randomized controlled trial with the target of 300 patients per arm. The setting is eleven community and three academic primary care practices in Metro Detroit. Patients are men and women aged between 50 and 75 years who are not up to date on colorectal cancer screening. ColoDATES Web (intervention arm), a decision aid that incorporates interactive personal risk assessment and preference clarification tools, is compared to a non-interactive website that matches ColoDATES Web in content but does not contain interactive tools (control arm). Primary outcomes are patient uptake of colorectal cancer screening; patient decision quality (knowledge, preference clarification, intent); clinician's degree of shared decision making; and patient-clinician concordance in the screening test chosen. Secondary outcome incorporates a Structural Equation Modeling approach to understand the mechanism of the causal pathway and test the validity of the proposed conceptual model based on Theory of Planned Behavior. Clinicians and those performing the analysis are blinded to arms.

DISCUSSION

The central hypothesis is that ColoDATES Web will improve colorectal cancer screening adherence through improvement in patient behavioral factors, shared decision making between the patient and the clinician, and concordance between the patient's and clinician's preferred colorectal cancer screening test. The results of this study will be among the first to examine the effect of a real-time preference assessment exercise on colorectal cancer screening and mediators, and, in doing so, will shed light on the patient-clinician communication and shared decision making 'black box' that currently exists between the delivery of decision aids to patients and subsequent patient behavior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01514786.

Measurement of colorectal cancer test use with medical claims data in a safety-net health system

BACKGROUND

Optimizing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening requires identification of unscreened individuals and tracking screening trends. A recent National Institutes of Health State of the Science Conference, "Enhancing Use and Quality of CRC Screening," cited a need for more population data sources for measurement of CRC screening, particularly for the medically underserved. Medical claims data (claims data) are created and maintained by many health systems to facilitate billing for services rendered and may be an efficient resource for identifying unscreened individuals. The aim of this study, conducted at a safety-net health system, was to determine whether CRC test use measured by claims data matches medical chart documentation.

METHODS

The authors randomly selected 400 patients from a universe of 20,000 patients previously included in an analysis of CRC test use based on claims data 2002-2006 in Tarrant Co, TX. Claims data were compared with medical chart documentation by estimation of agreement and examination of test use over/underdocumentation.

RESULTS

The authors found that agreement on test use was very good for fecal occult blood testing (κ = 0.83, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.90) and colonoscopy (κ = 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.85-0.96) and fair for sigmoidoscopy (κ = 0.39, 95% confidence interval: 0.28-0.49). Over- and underdocumentations of the 2 most commonly used CRC tests--colonoscopy and fecal occult blood testing--were rare.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of claims data by health systems to measure CRC test use is a promising alternative to measuring CRC test use with medical chart review and may be used to identify unscreened patients for screening interventions and track screening trends over time.

Correlates of self-reported colorectal cancer screening accuracy in a multi-specialty medical group practice

PURPOSE

We assessed whether accuracy of self-reported screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) varied by respondent characteristics or healthcare utilization.

METHODS

From 2005 to 2007, 857 respondents aged 51 - 74 were recruited from a multi-specialty medical group practice to answer a questionnaire about their CRC screening (CRCS) behaviors. Self-reports were compared with administrative and medical records to assess concordance, sensitivity, specificity, and report-to-records ratios for overall CRCS (fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, and/or colonoscopy).

RESULTS

Concordance was good (≥0.8 to <0.9) or fair (≥0.7 to <0.8) for most subgroups; respondents with >5 visits outside the clinic had poor (<0.7) concordance. Sensitivity estimates were mostly excellent (≥0.9) or good but poor for respondents whose healthcare provider did not advise a specific CRCS test. Specificity was poor for the following respondents: 65+ years, males, college graduates, family history of CRC, >5 visits outside of the clinic, or whose healthcare provider advised a specific CRCS test. Respondents 65+ years and with >5 outside visits over-reported CRCS.

CONCLUSIONS

With few exceptions, self-reports of CRCS in an insured population is reasonably accurate across subgroups. More work is needed to replicate these findings in diverse settings and populations to better understand subgroup differences and improve measures of CRCS.

Translation to practice of an intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among African Americans

In a previous report, we demonstrated the efficacy of an intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among African Americans in a controlled community intervention trial. Participants in the intervention, named EPICS (Educational Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening), were twice as likely to be screened after six months as those in the control group. In the current project, we put the intervention into practice through an academic-health department partnership, and the intervention performed as well as it had in the controlled trial. This success may be due to the community-based participatory methods used in designing and testing the intervention.

Self-reported cancer screening among elderly Medicare beneficiaries: a rural-urban comparison

PURPOSE

We examined the rural-urban disparity of screening for breast cancer and colorectal cancer (CRC) among the elder Medicare beneficiaries and assessed rurality's independent impact on receipt of screening.

METHODS

Using 2005 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, we applied weighted logistic regression to estimate the overall rural-urban disparity and rurality's independent impact on cancer screening, controlling for patient, and area factors.

RESULTS

From urban, large rural, small rural, and isolated rural areas, the rates for mammogram last year were 53%, 52%, 45%, and 44%, respectively. They were 56%, 50%, 48%, and 43% for CRC screening, respectively. After controlling for patient and area level characteristics, rurality is significantly associated with CRC screening, but not mammogram.

CONCLUSIONS

We found rural-urban disparities for both mammogram and CRC screenings. Patient and area factors totally eliminated the rural-urban disparity for mammogram but not CRC screening. Health promotions to improve cancer screening should focus more on small and isolated rural areas.

Is the accuracy of self-reported colorectal cancer screening associated with social desirability?

BACKGROUND

Self-reported cancer screening behaviors are often overreported and may lead to biased estimates of prevalence and of subgroup differences in screening. We examined whether the tendency to give socially desirable responses was associated with concordance between self-reported colorectal cancer (CRC) screening behaviors and medical records.

METHODS

Primary care patients (n = 857) age 50 to 74 years completed a mail, face-to-face, or telephone survey that assessed CRC screening and social desirability measured by a short version of the Marlowe-Crowne scale. We used medical records to verify self-reports of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and barium enema.

RESULTS

Social desirability scores were lower for whites versus African Americans, college graduates, and patients reporting no prior screening tests; they were higher for telephone versus mail or face-to-face survey respondents. In univariable logistic regression analysis, social desirability scores were not associated with concordance for FOBT (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.94-1.13), sigmoidoscopy (OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.86-1.04), or colonoscopy (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88-1.11); however, lower social desirability scores were associated with increased concordance for barium enema (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.77-0.99). In multivariable analyses, no associations were statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Social desirability as measured by the Marlowe-Crowne scale was not associated with accuracy of self-reported CRC tests in our sample, suggesting that other explanations for overreporting need to be explored.

IMPACT

By understanding sources of response bias, we can improve the accuracy of self-report measures.

Tradeoffs of using administrative claims and medical records to identify the use of personalized medicine for patients with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Administrative claims and medical records are important data sources to examine healthcare utilization and outcomes. Little is known about identifying personalized medicine technologies in these sources.

OBJECTIVES

To describe agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of administrative claims compared with medical records for 2 pairs of targeted tests and treatments for breast cancer.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of medical records linked to administrative claims from a large health plan. We examined whether agreement varied by factors that facilitate tracking in claims (coding and cost) and that enhance medical record completeness (records from multiple providers).

SUBJECTS

Women (35 to 65 y of age) with incident breast cancer diagnosed in 2006 to 2007 (n=775).

MEASURES

Use of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and gene expression profiling (GEP) testing, trastuzumab, and adjuvant chemotherapy in claims and medical records.

RESULTS

Agreement between claims and records was substantial for GEP, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy, and lowest for HER2 tests. GEP, an expensive test with unique billing codes, had higher agreement (91.6% vs. 75.2%), sensitivity (94.9% vs. 76.7%), and specificity (90.1% vs. 29.2%) than HER2, a test without unique billing codes. Trastuzumab, a treatment with unique billing codes, had slightly higher agreement (95.1% vs. 90%) and sensitivity (98.1% vs. 87.9%) than adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher agreement and specificity were associated with services that had unique billing codes and high cost. Administrative claims may be sufficient for examining services with unique billing codes. Medical records provide better data for identifying tests lacking specific codes and for research requiring detailed clinical information.

Geographic variation of racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer testing among medicare enrollees

BACKGROUND

The Medicare population has documented racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but it is unknown whether these disparities differ across geographic regions.

METHODS

Among Medicare enrollees within 8 US states, we ascertained up-to-date CRC screening on December 31, 2003 (fecal occult blood testing in the prior year or sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the prior 5 years). Logistic regression models tested for regional variation in up-to-date status among white versus different nonwhite populations (blacks, Asian/Pacific Islanders [APIs], Hispanics). We estimated regression-adjusted region-specific prevalence of up-to-date status by race/ethnicity and compared adjusted white versus nonwhite up-to-date prevalence across regions by using generalized least squares regression.

RESULTS

White versus nonwhite up-to-date status varied significantly across regions for blacks (P = .01) and APIs (P < .001) but not Hispanics (P = .62). Whereas the white versus black differences in proportion up-to-date were greatest in Atlanta (Georgia), rural Georgia, and the San Francisco Bay Area of California (range, 10%-16% differences, blacks

CONCLUSIONS

Significant geographic variation in up-to-date status among black and API Medicare enrollees is associated with heterogeneous racial/ethnic disparities for these groups across US regions.

Collapse

Key Words

• cancer screening
• colorectal cancer
• disparities
• geography of health
• medicare

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Aged
• Black People
• Colonoscopy
• Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data
• Ethnicity
• Female
• Healthcare Disparities/ethnology
• Hispanic or Latino
• Humans
• Male
• Medicare
• Occult Blood
• Rural Population
• United States
• White People
• Black or African American

Collapse

Grants

• P30 CA093373 NCI NIH HHS

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Thomas J Semrad Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis Sacramento, California 95817, USA.
Daniel J Tancredi
Laura-Mae Baldwin
Pamela Green
Joshua J Fenton

Collapse

Physicians' colorectal cancer screening discussion and recommendation patterns

BACKGROUND

Primary care physician (PCP) actions are pivotal to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening performance, and guidelines recommend discussion with patients about test options and potential benefits and harms. This article profiles patterns of discussion about and recommendations for screening and explores potential associations with multilevel factors (patient, clinician, practice, and environment).

METHODS

In 2009, we analyzed data from 1,266 physicians responding to the 2006-2007 National Survey of Primary Care Physicians' Recommendations and Practices for Breast, Cervical, Colorectal, and Lung Cancer Screening (absolute response rate=69.3%; cooperation rate=75.0%). Descriptive statistics examined physicians' reports of discussion and recommendations. Multivariate analyses assessed the associations of these practices with multilevel factors.

RESULTS

Although few respondents reported discussion of all options, 46% usually discuss more than one option; the vast majority of these respondents discuss fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and colonoscopy (49%) or FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy (32%). Of physicians who discuss more than one option, a majority reported usually recommending one or more test options, most commonly colonoscopy alone (43%) and FOBT and colonoscopy (43%). Several personal characteristics (specialty), perceived patient characteristics (prefer physician to decide), practice characteristics (geographic location), and community barriers (specialist availability) were independently associated with discussion and/or recommendation patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs do not discuss the full menu of test options, but many report selecting one or two options for discussion and recommendation. To ensure that patients' perspectives and concerns are elicited and considered, patient decision-making approaches should be considered.

IMPACT

Attention to informed decision making in CRC screening will be important for enhancing patient-centered quality care.

Screening for colorectal cancer in a safety-net health care system: access to care is critical and has implications for screening policy

BACKGROUND

Data on the number of individuals eligible for screening, and rates of screening, are necessary to assess national colorectal cancer screening efforts. Such data are sparse for safety-net health systems.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of individuals ages 50 to 75 served by a safety-net health system in Tarrant County, TX was conducted to determine (a) the size of the potential screen-eligible population ages 50 to 75, (b) the rate of screening over 5 years among individuals ages 54 to 75, and (c) the potential predictors of screening, including sex, race/ethnicity, insurance status, frequency of outpatient visits, and socioeconomic status.

RESULTS

Of 28,708 potential screen-eligible individuals, 20,416 were ages 54 to 75 and analyzed for screening; 22.0% were screened within the preceding 5 years. Female gender, Hispanic ethnicity, ages 65 to 75, insurance status, and two or more outpatient visits were independently associated with screening. Access to care was an important factor: adjusted odds ratio, 2.57 (95% confidence interval, 2.23-2.98) for any insurance; adjusted odds ratio, 3.53 (95% confidence interval, 3.15-3.97) for two or more outpatient visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The screen-eligible population served by our safety-net health system was large, and the projected deficit in screen rates was substantial. Access to care was the dominant predictor of screening participation. If our results are replicable in similar health systems, the data suggest that screening guidelines and policy efforts must take into account the feasibility of proposed interventions. Strong advocacy for more resources for colorectal cancer screening interventions (including research into the best manner to provide screening for large populations) is needed.

Are gender differences in colorectal cancer screening rates due to differences in self-reporting?

OBJECTIVE

Studies have found that women are less likely than men to undergo colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. While one source of these disparities may be gender differences in barriers and facilitators to screening, another may be differences in reporting bias.

METHOD

In this study of 345 male and female veterans, conducted in 2006 in Minneapolis, MN, we examined CRC screening adherence rates by gender using medical records and self-report and assessed whether any differences were due to reporting bias.

RESULTS

We found a significantly higher rate of colonoscopy use among men when using self-report data, but no significant differences in either overall or test-specific screening adherence when using medical record data. Analyses examining the prevalence and determinants of concordance between self-report and medical records screening revealed that compared to women, men were less accurate in reporting sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy and over-reported screening by colonoscopy. Men were also more likely to have missing self-report data and how missing data were handled affected differences in screening behavior. Accuracy in screening behavior was not explained by demographic variables, good physical or mental health, or physician recommendation for screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Reported gender disparities in CRC screening adherence may be a result of reporting bias.

Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: recommendations and practices, 2006-2007

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians (hereafter, physicians) play a critical role in the delivery of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in the U.S. This study describes the CRC screening recommendations and practices of U.S. physicians and compares them to findings from a 1999-2000 national provider survey.

METHODS

Data from 1266 physicians responding to the 2006-2007 National Survey of Primary Care Physicians' Recommendations and Practices for Breast, Cervical, Colorectal, and Lung Cancer Screening (cooperation rate=75%) were analyzed in 2008. Descriptive statistics were used to examine physicians' CRC screening recommendations and practices as well as the office systems used to support screening activities. Sample weights were applied in the analyses to obtain national estimates.

RESULTS

Ninety-five percent of physicians routinely recommend screening colonoscopy to asymptomatic, average-risk patients; 80% recommend fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). Only a minority recommend sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, or fecal DNA testing. Fifty-six percent recommend two screening modalities; 17% recommend one. Nearly all physicians who recommend endoscopy refer their patients for the procedure. Four percent perform sigmoidoscopy, a 25-percentage-point decline from 1999-2000. Although 61% of physicians reported that their practice had guidelines for CRC screening, only 30% use provider reminders; 15% use patient reminders.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' CRC screening recommendations and practices have changed substantially since 1999-2000. Colonoscopy is now the most frequently recommended test. Most physicians do not recommend the full menu of test options prescribed in national guidelines. Few perform sigmoidoscopy. Office systems to support CRC screening are lacking in many physicians' practices. Given ongoing changes in CRC screening technologies and guidelines, the continued monitoring of physicians' CRC screening recommendations and practices is imperative.

Yield of claims data and surveys for determining colon cancer screening among health plan members

Screening can reduce incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer but has been underutilized. Efforts to increase screening depend on accurate data about screening status. We sought to evaluate the independent and combined yield of claims and direct survey for identifying colorectal cancer screening among average-risk health plan beneficiaries. Participants were Aetna members ages between 52 and 80 years from 32 primary care practices in Florida and Georgia participating in the Communicating Health Options through Information and Cancer Education study. Main outcomes were the proportion of average-risk patients who were up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening based on claims data and the estimated additional yield of survey data for patients with no evidence of screening in their claims history. Of 4,020 average-risk members identified, claims data indicated that 1,066 (27%) had recent colorectal cancer screening. Among the 1,269 average-risk members with no evidence of screening by claims data who returned surveys, 498 (39%) reported being up-to-date with screening. Combining claims data and survey data and accounting for survey nonresponse, we estimate that 47% to 59% of member patients were actually up-to-date with screening, an additional yield of 20 to 32 percentage points. We conclude that, among health plan members, the combination of claims data and survey information had substantially higher yield than claims data alone for identifying colorectal cancer screening.

Persistent racial and ethnic disparities in up-to-date colorectal cancer testing in medicare enrollees

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether greater colonoscopy use among white as compared with nonwhite Medicare enrollees since Medicare established coverage for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been associated with a widening in white versus nonwhite disparities in up-to-date CRC testing status.

DESIGN

Serial cross-sectional analysis of Medicare claims.

SETTING

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) regions in nine states, representing 14% of the U.S. population.

PARTICIPANTS

A 5% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare enrollees aged 70 to 79 within each 6-month period from mid-1995 through 2003.

MEASUREMENTS

Trends in up-to-date status (having a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) claim in the prior year or a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy claim in the prior 5 years) according to race or ethnicity, estimated using repeated-measures logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, rural versus urban residence, income, comorbidity, and SEER region.

RESULTS

From mid-1995 through 2003, the adjusted percentage of enrollees that were up-to-date increased by a similar magnitude in whites (from 39.4% to 47.3%), blacks (from 29.0% to 38.1%), Asians and Pacific Islanders (from 33.1% to 41.8%), and Hispanics (from 23.7% to 33.2%). Although white versus nonwhite disparities in up-to-date status via colonoscopy widened, this was counterbalanced by narrowing white versus nonwhite disparities in up-to-date status via FOBT and sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSION

White versus nonwhite disparities in up-to-date CRC testing status in Medicare enrollees largely persisted through 2003.

Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery

Accurate measurement of cancer-preventive behaviors is important for quality improvement, research studies, and public health surveillance. Findings differ, however, depending on whether patient self-report or medical records are used as the data source. We evaluated concordance between patient self-report and medical records on risk factors, cancer screening, and behavioral counseling among primary care patients. Data from patient surveys and medical records were compared from 742 patients in 25 New Jersey primary care practices participating at baseline in SCOPE (supporting colorectal cancer outcomes through participatory enhancements), an intervention trial to improve colorectal cancer screening in primary care offices. Sensitivity, specificity, and rates of agreement describe concordance between self-report and medical records for risk factors (personal or family history of cancer, smoking), cancer screening (breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate), and counseling (cancer screening recommendations, diet or weight loss, exercise, smoking cessation). Rates of agreement ranged from 41% (smoking cessation counseling) to 96% (personal history of cancer). Cancer screening agreement ranged from 61% (Pap and prostate-specific antigen) to 83% (colorectal endoscopy) with self-report rates greater than medical record rates. Counseling was also reported more frequently by self-report (83% by patient self-report versus 34% by medical record for smoking cessation counseling). Deciding which data source to use will depend on the outcome of interest, whether the data is used for clinical decision making, performance tracking, or population surveillance; the availability of resources; and whether a false positive or a false negative is of more concern.