Electronic Trigger-Based Intervention to Reduce Delays in Diagnostic Evaluation for Cancer: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Future Health Today and patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer: a pragmatic cluster randomised trial of quality- improvement activities in general practice

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing cancer in general practice is complex, given the non-specific nature of many presenting symptoms and the overlap of potential diagnoses.

AIM

This trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Future Health Today (FHT) - a technology that provides clinical decision support, auditing, and quality-improvement monitoring - on the appropriate follow-up of patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Pragmatic, cluster randomised trial undertaken in general practices in Victoria and Tasmania, Australia.

METHOD

Practices were randomly assigned to receive recommendations for follow-up investigations for cancer (FHT cancer module) or the active control. Algorithms were applied to the electronic medical record, and used demographic information and abnormal test results that are associated with a risk of undiagnosed cancer (that is, anaemia/iron deficiency, thrombocytosis, and raised prostate-specific antigen) to identify patients requiring further investigation and provide recommendations for care. The intervention consisted of the FHT cancer module, a case-based learning series, and ongoing practice support. Using the intention-to-treat approach, the between-arm difference in the proportion of patients with abnormal test results who were followed up according to guidelines was determined at 12 months.

RESULTS

In total, 7555 patients were identified as at risk of undiagnosed cancer. At 12 months post-randomisation, 76.0% of patients in the intervention arm had received recommended follow-up (21 practices, n = 2820/3709), compared with 70.0% in the control arm (19 practices, n = 2693/3846; estimated between-arm difference = 2.6% [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -2.8% to 7.9%; odds ratio = 1.15 [95% CI = 0.87 to 1.53]; P = 0.332).

CONCLUSION

The FHT cancer module intervention did not increase the proportion of patients receiving guideline-concordant care. The proportion of patients receiving recommended follow-up was high, suggesting a possible ceiling effect for the intervention.

Negative spillover due to constraints on care delivery: a potential source of bias in pragmatic clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic clinical trials evaluate the effectiveness of health interventions in real-world settings. Negative spillover can arise in a pragmatic trial if the study intervention affects how scarce resources are allocated across patients in the intervention and comparison groups.

MAIN BODY

Negative spillover can lead to overestimation of treatment effect and harm to patients assigned to usual care in trials of diverse health interventions. While this type of spillover has been addressed in trials of social welfare and public health interventions, there is little recognition of this source of bias in the medical literature. In this commentary, I examine what causes negative spillover and how it may have led clinical trial investigators to overestimate the effect of patient navigation, AI-based physiological alarms, and elective induction of labor. Trials discussed here are a convenience sample and not the result of a systematic review. I also suggest ways to detect negative spillover and design trials that avoid this potential source of bias.

CONCLUSION

As new clinical practices and technologies that affect care delivery are considered for widespread adoption, well-designed trials are needed to provide valid evidence on their risks and benefits. Understanding all sources of bias that could affect these trials, including negative spillover, is a critical part of this effort. Future guidance on clinical trial design should consider addressing this form of spillover, just as current guidance often discusses bias due to lack of blinding, differential attrition, or contamination.

Adoption, acceptance, and use of a decision support tool to promote timely investigations for cancer in primary care

BACKGROUND

The complexities of diagnosing cancer in general practice has driven the development of quality improvement (QI) interventions, including clinical decision support (CDS) and auditing tools. Future Health Today (FHT) is a novel QI tool, consisting of CDS at the point-of-care, practice population-level auditing, recall, and the monitoring of QI activities.

OBJECTIVES

Explore the acceptability and usability of the FHT cancer module, which flags patients with abnormal test results that may be indicative of undiagnosed cancer.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs), from practices participating in a randomized trial evaluating the appropriate follow-up of patients. Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT) was used to analyse and interpret the data.

RESULTS

The majority of practices reported not using the auditing and QI components of the tool, only the CDS which was delivered at the point-of-care. The tool was used primarily by GPs; GPNs did not perceive the clinical recommendations to be within their role. For the CDS, facilitators for use included a good workflow fit, ease of use, low time cost, importance, and perceived knowledge gain. Barriers for use of the CDS included accuracy, competing priorities, and the patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDS aligned with the clinical workflow of GPs, was considered non-disruptive to the consultation and easy to implement into usual care. By applying the CP-FIT theory, we were able to demonstrate the key drivers for GPs using the tool, and what limited the use by GPNs.

Interventions to improve timely cancer diagnosis: an integrative review

Cancer will affect more than one in three U.S. residents in their lifetime, and although the diagnosis will be made efficiently in most of these cases, roughly one in five patients will experience a delayed or missed diagnosis. In this integrative review, we focus on missed opportunities in the diagnosis of breast, lung, and colorectal cancer in the ambulatory care environment. From a review of 493 publications, we summarize the current evidence regarding the contributing factors to missed or delayed cancer diagnosis in ambulatory care, as well as evidence to support possible strategies for intervention. Cancer diagnoses are made after follow-up of a positive screening test or an incidental finding, or most commonly, by following up and clarifying non-specific initial presentations to primary care. Breakdowns and delays are unacceptably common in each of these pathways, representing failures to follow-up on abnormal test results, incidental findings, non-specific symptoms, or consults. Interventions aimed at 'closing the loop' represent an opportunity to improve the timeliness of cancer diagnosis and reduce the harm from diagnostic errors. Improving patient engagement, using 'safety netting,' and taking advantage of the functionality offered through health information technology are all viable options to address these problems.

Reducing the Risk of Delayed Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses Through an Ambulatory Safety Net Collaborative

BACKGROUND

An estimated 12 million adults in the United States experience delayed diagnoses and other diagnostic errors annually. Ambulatory safety nets (ASNs) are an intervention to reduce delayed diagnoses by identifying patients with abnormal results overdue for follow-up using registries, workflow redesign, and patient navigation. The authors sought to co-design a collaborative and implement colorectal cancer (CRC) ASNs across various health care settings.

METHODS

A working group was convened to co-design implementation guidance, measures, and the collaborative model. Collaborative sites were recruited through a medical professional liability insurance program and chose to begin with developing an ASN for positive at-home CRC screening or overdue surveillance colonoscopy. The 18-month Breakthrough Series Collaborative ran from January 2022 to July 2023, with sites continuing to collect data while sustaining their ASNs. Data were collected from sites monthly on patients in the ASN, including the proportion that was successfully contacted, scheduled, and completed a follow-up colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Six sites participated; four had an operational ASN at the end of the Breakthrough Series, with the remaining sites launching three months later. From October 2022 through February 2024, the Collaborative ASNs collectively identified 5,165 patients from the registry as needing outreach. Among patients needing outreach, 3,555 (68.8%) were successfully contacted, 2,060 (39.9%) were scheduled for a colonoscopy, and 1,504 (29.1%) completed their colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

The Collaborative successfully identified patients with previously abnormal CRC screening and facilitated completion of follow-up testing. The CRC ASN Implementation Guide offers a comprehensive road map for health care leaders interested in implementing CRC ASNs.

A Virtual Breakthrough Series Collaborative for Missed Test Results: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Missed test results, defined as test results not followed up within an appropriate time frame, are common and lead to delays in diagnosis and treatment.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of a quality improvement collaborative, the Virtual Breakthrough Series (VBTS), on the follow-up rate of 2 types of test results prone to being missed: chest imaging suspicious for lung cancer and laboratory findings suggestive of colorectal cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This stepped-wedge cluster-randomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2020 and March 2022 at 12 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers, with a predefined 3-cohort roll-out. Each cohort was exposed to 3 phases: preintervention, action, and continuous improvement. Follow-up ranged from 0 to 12 months, depending on cohort. Teams at each site were led by a project leader and included diverse interdisciplinary representation, with a mix of clinical and technical experts, senior leaders, nursing champions, and other interdisciplinary team members. Analysis was conducted per protocol, and data were analyzed from April 2022 to March 2024.

Intervention

All teams participated in a VBTS, which included instruction on reducing rates of missed test results at their site.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was changes in the percentage of abnormal test result follow-up, comparing the preintervention phase with the action phase. Secondary outcomes were effects across cohorts and the intervention's effect on sites with the highest and lowest preintervention follow-up rates. Previously validated electronic algorithms measured abnormal imaging and laboratory test result follow-up rates.

Results

A total of 11 teams completed the VBTS and implemented 47 (mean, 4 per team; range, 3-8 per team; mode, 3 per team) unique interventions to improve missed test results. A total of 40 027 colorectal cancer-related tests were performed, with 5130 abnormal results, of which 1286 results were flagged by the electronic trigger (e-trigger) algorithm as being missed. For lung cancer-related studies, 376 765 tests were performed, with 7314 abnormal results and 2436 flagged by the e-trigger as being missed. There was no significant difference in the percentage of abnormal test results followed up by study phase, consistent across all 3 cohorts. The estimated mean difference between the preintervention and action phases was -0.78 (95% CI, -6.88 to 5.31) percentage points for the colorectal e-trigger and 0.36 (95% CI, -5.19 to 5.9) percentage points for the lung e-trigger. However, there was a significant effect of the intervention by site, with the site with the lowest follow-up rate at baseline increasing its follow-up rate from 27.8% in the preintervention phase to 55.6% in the action phase.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cluster-randomized clinical trial of the VBTS intervention, there was no improvement in the percentage of test results receiving follow-up. However, the VBTS may offer benefits for sites with low baseline performance.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04166240.

Computable phenotype for diagnostic error: developing the data schema for application of symptom-disease pair analysis of diagnostic error (SPADE)

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic errors are the leading cause of preventable harm in clinical practice. Implementable tools to quantify and target this problem are needed. To address this gap, we aimed to generalize the Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error (SPADE) framework by developing its computable phenotype and then demonstrated how that schema could be applied in multiple clinical contexts.

METHODS

We created an information model for the SPADE processes, then mapped data fields from electronic health records (EHR) and claims data in use to that model to create the SPADE information model (intention) and the SPADE computable phenotype (extension). Later we validated the computable phenotype and tested it in four case studies in three different health systems to demonstrate its utility.

RESULTS

We mapped and tested the SPADE computable phenotype in three different sites using four different case studies. We showed that data fields to compute an SPADE base measure are fully available in the EHR Data Warehouse for extraction and can operationalize the SPADE framework from provider and/or insurer perspective, and they could be implemented on numerous health systems for future work in monitor misdiagnosis-related harms.

CONCLUSIONS

Data for the SPADE base measure is readily available in EHR and administrative claims. The method of data extraction is potentially universally applicable, and the data extracted is conveniently available within a network system. Further study is needed to validate the computable phenotype across different settings with different data infrastructures.

Unravelling the lung cancer diagnostic pathway: identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement

BACKGROUND

A fast and well-organized complex diagnostic process is important for better success in the treatment of lung cancer patients. The aim of our study was to reveal the gaps and inefficiencies in the diagnostic process and to suggest improvement strategies in a single tertiary centre in Slovenia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We employed a comprehensive approach to carefully dissect all the steps in the diagnostic journey for individuals suspected of having lung cancer. We gathered and analysed information from employees and patients involved in the process by dedicated questionnaires. Further, we analysed the patients' data and calculated the diagnostic intervals for patients in two different periods.

RESULTS

The major concerns among employees were stress and excessive administrative work. The important result of the visual journey and staff reports was the design of electronic diagnostic clinical pathway (eDCP), which could substantially increase safety and efficacy by diminishing the administrative burden of the employees. The patients were generally highly satisfied with diagnostic journey, but reported too long waiting times. By analysing two time periods, we revealed that diagnostic intervals exceeded the recommended timelines and got importantly shorter after two interventions - strengthening the diagnostic team and specially by purchase of additional PET-CT machine (the average time from general practitioner (GP) referral to the multidisciplinary treatment board (MDTB) decision was 50.8 [± 3.0] prior and 37.1 [± 2.3] days after the interventions).

CONCLUSIONS

The study illuminated opportunities for refining the diagnostic journey for lung cancer patients, underscoring the importance of both administrative and capacity-related enhancements.

Medical Home Implementation and Follow-Up of Cancer-Related Abnormal Test Results in the Veterans Health Administration

Importance

Lack of timely follow-up of cancer-related abnormal test results can lead to delayed or missed diagnoses, adverse cancer outcomes, and substantial cost burden for patients. Care delivery models, such as the Veterans Affairs' (VA) Patient-Aligned Care Team (PACT), which aim to improve patient-centered care coordination, could potentially also improve timely follow-up of abnormal test results. PACT was implemented nationally in the VA between 2010 and 2012.

Objective

To evaluate the long-term association between PACT implementation and timely follow-up of abnormal test results related to the diagnosis of 5 different cancers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multiyear retrospective cohort study used 14 years of VA data (2006-2019), which were analyzed using panel data-based random-effects linear regressions. The setting included all VA clinics and facilities. The participants were adult patients who underwent diagnostic testing related to 5 different cancers and had abnormal test results. Data extraction and statistical analyses were performed from September 2021 to December 2023.

Exposure

Calendar years denoting preperiods and postperiods of PACT implementation, and the PACT Implementation Progress Index Score denoting the extent of implementation in each VA clinic and facility.

Main Outcome and Measure

Percentage of potentially missed timely follow-ups of abnormal test results.

Results

This study analyzed 6 data sets representing 5 different types of cancers. During the initial years of PACT implementation (2010 to 2013), percentage of potentially missed timely follow-ups decreased between 3 to 7 percentage points for urinalysis suggestive of bladder cancer, 12 to 14 percentage points for mammograms suggestive of breast cancer, 19 to 22 percentage points for fecal tests suggestive of colorectal cancer, and 6 to 13 percentage points for iron deficiency anemia laboratory tests suggestive of colorectal cancer, with no statistically significant changes for α-fetoprotien tests and lung cancer imaging. However, these beneficial reductions were not sustained over time. Better PACT implementation scores were associated with a decrease in potentially missed timely follow-up percentages for urinalysis (0.3-percentage point reduction [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.1] with 1-point increase in the score), and laboratory tests suggestive of iron deficiency anemia (0.5-percentage point reduction [95% CI,-0.8 to -0.2] with 1-point increase in the score).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that implementation of PACT in the VA was associated with a potential short-term improvement in the quality of follow-up for certain test results. Additional multifaceted sustained interventions to reduce missed test results are required to prevent care delays.

Improving the diagnostic process for patients with possible bladder and kidney cancer: a mixed-methods study to identify potential missed diagnostic opportunities

BACKGROUND

Patients with bladder and kidney cancer may experience diagnostic delays.

AIM

To identify patterns of suboptimal care and contributors of potential missed diagnostic opportunities (MDOs).

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective, mixed-methods study recruiting participants from nine general practices in Eastern England between June 2018 and October 2019.

METHOD

Patients with possible bladder and kidney cancer were identified using eligibility criteria based on National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for suspected cancer. Primary care records were reviewed at recruitment and at 1 year for data on symptoms, tests, referrals, and diagnosis. Referral predictors were examined using logistic regression. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 15 patients to explore their experiences of the diagnostic process, and these were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 940) were mostly female (n = 657, 69.9%), with a median age of 71 years (interquartile range 64-77 years). In total, 268 (28.5%) received a referral and 465 (48.5%) had a final diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI). There were 33 (3.5%) patients who were diagnosed with cancer, including prostate (n = 17), bladder (n = 7), and upper urothelial tract (n = 1) cancers. Among referred patients, those who had a final diagnosis of UTI had the longest time to referral (median 81.5 days). Only one-third of patients with recurrent UTIs were referred despite meeting NICE referral guidelines. Qualitative findings revealed barriers during the diagnostic process, including inadequate clinical examination, female patients given repeated antibiotics without clinical reviews, and suboptimal communication of test results to patients.

CONCLUSION

Older females with UTIs might be at increased risk of MDOs for cancer. Targeting barriers during the initial diagnostic assessment and follow-up might improve quality of diagnosis.

Time duration and health care resource use during cancer diagnoses in the United States: A large claims database analysis

BACKGROUND: Cancer diagnostic pathways are highly variable and not clearly established in the United States, which can lead to a diagnosis process that takes more time and exposes patients to invasive or unnecessary procedures, delays in treatment, worsening patient outcomes, and elevated health care resource utilization (HRU) and health care system costs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate current trends in time to diagnosis and diagnostic-related HRU preceding the patient's cancer diagnosis across all cancer types in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted on patients newly diagnosed with cancer identified from 2018-2019 using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which includes Medicare Advantage and commercially insured members. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes and were required to have at least 2 outpatient visits at least 30 days apart or at least 1 inpatient cancer visit without prior cancer claims. The first diagnostic test was identified based on an algorithm of a 60-day gap between diagnostic tests prior to diagnosis. The index date was defined as the first diagnostic test date or an office visit less than 4 weeks prior to the first diagnostic test date. Patient characteristics, time to diagnosis, and HRU were descriptively analyzed for all patients and by cancer type. RESULTS: Among the 458,818 patients newly diagnosed with cancer included in this analysis, the mean age was 70.6 years, approximately half were female, and most were White people (65.0%) with Medicare Advantage coverage (74.0%). Patients with cancer had an overall mean (SD) time to diagnosis of 156.2 (164.9) days and 15.4% of patients waited longer than 180 days before a cancer diagnosis. High heterogeneity among cancer types was observed, with a mean time to diagnosis ranging from 121.6 days (bladder cancer) to 229.0 days (multiple myeloma). Imaging resource use during the diagnostic pathway was high for radiology (60.7%), computerized tomography (50.8%), magnetic resonance imaging (48.6%), and ultrasound (42.6%). A total of 69.3% of patients had endoscopy without biopsy, 36.5% had endoscopy with biopsy, 62.5% had other biopsies, and most patients did general urine and serum tests (91.3%) and nongenetic cancer-specific laboratory tests (84.3%). Resource use was highly varied by cancer type but tended to increase with a longer time to diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients experiencing a diagnostic process of longer than 180 days is clinically and economically meaningful. Diagnostic-related HRU was significant and highly variable, highlighting the inefficiencies in the cancer diagnostic process in the United States and the need for policies, guidelines, or medical interventions to streamline cancer diagnostic pathways to optimize patient outcomes and reduce health care system burden. DISCLOSURES: Dr Cong is an employee of Grail, LLC, which supported this study. Drs Gitlin and McGarvey are employees of BluePath Solutions, and Ms Shivaprakash was an employee of BluePath Solutions, which received financial support from Grail, LLC, for study-related research activities. This study was sponsored by Grail, LLC, a subsidiary of Illumina Inc. currently held separate from Illumina Inc. under the terms of the Interim Measures Order of the European Commission dated October 29, 2021. The sponsor had no role in the collection, management, and analysis of the data. The sponsor contributed to study design and data interpretation.

Diagnostic delays among COVID-19 patients with a second concurrent diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the effect of a new pandemic on diagnostic errors.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify delayed second diagnoses among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with COVID-19.

DESIGNS

An observational cohort Study.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive hospitalized adult patients presenting to the ED of a tertiary referral center with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron variant surges. Included patients had evidence of a second diagnosis during their ED stay.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was delayed diagnosis (without documentation or treatment in the ED). Contributing factors were assessed using two logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 1249 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 216 (17%) had evidence of a second diagnosis in the ED. The second diagnosis of 73 patients (34%) was delayed, with a mean (SD) delay of 1.5 (0.8) days. Medical treatment was deferred in 63 patients (86%) and interventional therapy in 26 (36%). The probability of an ED diagnosis was the lowest for Infection-related diagnoses (56%) and highest for surgical-related diagnoses (89%). Evidence for the second diagnosis by physical examination (adjusted odds ratios [AOR] 2.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-4.68) or by imaging (AOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.16-3.79) were predictors for ED diagnosis. Low oxygen saturation (AOR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.79) and cough or dyspnea (AOR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25-0.94) in the ED were predictors of a delayed second diagnosis.

Increasing the value of PSA through improved implementation

Low-value testing and treatment contribute to billions of dollars in waste to the United States health care system annually. High frequency, low-cost testing, including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, is a major contributor to this inefficient health care delivery. Despite decreasing mortality of prostate cancer over the last few decades, the reputation of prostate specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer screening has fluctuated over the last decade due to lack of clarity of the benefits of screening and high risk for overtreatment. The value of PSA could be improved by efficient implementation of smarter testing strategies that reduce the harms and increase the benefits.

Multiple Myeloma for the Primary Care Provider: A Practical Review to Promote Earlier Diagnosis Among Diverse Populations

Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy in the United States and the most common hematologic malignancy among Blacks/African Americans. Delay in diagnosis is common and has been associated with inferior disease-free survival and increased rates of myeloma-related complications. Despite a roughly 2-times higher risk of multiple myeloma, diagnostic delay appears more common, and improvements in 5-year survival rates have been slower among Blacks/African Americans than their White counterparts. When patient symptoms and basic laboratory findings are suggestive of multiple myeloma, the primary care provider should initiate extended laboratory work-up that includes serum protein electrophoresis, serum immunoglobulin free light chain assay, and serum immunofixation. Heightened awareness within high-risk populations such as Blacks/African Americans may help to eliminate racial disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma.

Understanding barriers to diagnosis in a rare, genetic disease: Delays and errors in diagnosing schwannomatosis

Diagnosis of rare, genetic diseases is challenging, but conceptual frameworks of the diagnostic process can guide quality improvement initiatives. Using the National Academy of Medicine diagnostic framework, we assessed the extent of, and reasons for diagnostic delays and diagnostic errors in schwannomatosis, a neurogenetic syndrome characterized by nerve sheath tumors and chronic pain. We reviewed the medical records of 97 people with confirmed or probable schwannomatosis seen in two US tertiary care clinics. Time-to-event analysis revealed a median time from first symptom to diagnosis of 16.7 years (95% CI, 7.5-26.0 years) and median time from first medical consultation to diagnosis of 9.8 years (95% CI, 3.5-16.2 years). Factors associated with longer times to diagnosis included initial signs/symptoms that were intermittent, non-specific, or occurred at younger ages (p < 0.05). Thirty-six percent of patients were misdiagnosed; misdiagnoses were of underlying genetic condition (18.6%), pain etiology (16.5%), and nerve sheath tumor presence/pathology (11.3%) (non-mutually exclusive categories). One-fifth (19.6%) of patients had a clear missed opportunity for genetics workup that could have led to an earlier schwannomatosis diagnosis. These results suggest that interventions in clinician education, genetic testing availability, expert review of pathology findings, and automatic triggers for genetics referrals may improve diagnosis of schwannomatosis.

Optimization of a Quality Improvement Tool for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care: Qualitative Study

Background

The most common route to a diagnosis of cancer is through primary care. Delays in diagnosing cancer occur when an opportunity to make a timely diagnosis is missed and is evidenced by patients visiting the general practitioner (GP) on multiple occasions before referral to a specialist. Tools that minimize prolonged diagnostic intervals and reduce missed opportunities to investigate patients for cancer are therefore a priority.

Objective

This study aims to explore the usefulness and feasibility of a novel quality improvement (QI) tool in which algorithms flag abnormal test results that may be indicative of undiagnosed cancer. This study allows for the optimization of the cancer recommendations before testing the efficacy in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods

GPs, practice nurses, practice managers, and consumers were recruited to participate in individual interviews or focus groups. Participants were purposively sampled as part of a pilot and feasibility study, in which primary care practices were receiving recommendations relating to the follow-up of abnormal test results for prostate-specific antigen, thrombocytosis, and iron-deficiency anemia. The Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT) was applied to the analysis using a thematic approach.

Results

A total of 17 interviews and 3 focus groups (n=18) were completed. Participant themes were mapped to CP-FIT across the constructs of context, recipient, and feedback variables. The key facilitators to use were alignment with workflow, recognized need, the perceived importance of the clinical topic, and the GPs’ perception that the recommendations were within their control. Barriers to use included competing priorities, usability and complexity of the recommendations, and knowledge of the clinical topic. There was consistency between consumer and practitioner perspectives, reporting language concerns associated with the word cancer, the need for more patient-facing resources, and time constraints of the consultation to address patients’ worries.

Conclusions

There was a recognized need for the QI tool to support the diagnosis of cancer in primary care, but barriers were identified that hindered the usability and actionability of the recommendations in practice. In response, the tool has been refined and is currently being evaluated as part of a randomized controlled trial. Successful and effective implementation of this QI tool could support the detection of patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer in primary care and assist in preventing unnecessary delays.

Effect of an Antiracism Intervention on Racial Disparities in Time to Lung Cancer Surgery

PURPOSE

Timely lung cancer surgery is a metric of high-quality cancer care and improves survival for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. Historically, Black patients experience longer delays to surgery than White patients and have lower survival rates. Antiracism interventions have shown benefits in reducing racial disparities in lung cancer treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity, an antiracism prospective pragmatic trial, at five cancer centers to assess the impact on overall timeliness of lung cancer surgery and racial disparities in timely surgery. The intervention consisted of (1) a real-time warning system to identify unmet care milestones, (2) race-specific feedback on lung cancer treatment rates, and (3) patient navigation. The primary outcome was surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using log-binomial regression and adjusted for clinical and demographic factors.

RESULTS

A total of 2,363 patients with stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer were included in the analyses: intervention (n = 263), retrospective control (n = 1,798), and concurrent control (n = 302). 87.1% of Black patients and 85.4% of White patients in the intervention group (P = .13) received surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis compared with 58.7% of Black patients and 75.0% of White patients in the retrospective group (P < .01) and 64.9% of Black patients and 73.2% of White patients (P = .29) in the concurrent group. Black patients in the intervention group were more likely to receive timely surgery than Black patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.64). White patients in the intervention group also had timelier surgery than White patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.18).

CONCLUSION

Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity is associated with timelier lung cancer surgery and reduction of the racial gap in timely surgery.

A Library of Logic Models to Explain How Interventions to Reduce Diagnostic Errors Work

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to create a library of logic models for interventions to reduce diagnostic error. This library can be used by those developing, implementing, or evaluating an intervention to improve patient care, to understand what needs to happen, and in what order, if the intervention is to be effective.

METHODS

To create the library, we modified an existing method for generating logic models. The following five ordered activities to include in each model were defined: preintervention; implementation of the intervention; postimplementation, but before the immediate outcome can occur; the immediate outcome (usually behavior change); and postimmediate outcome, but before a reduction in diagnostic errors can occur. We also included reasons for lack of progress through the model. Relevant information was extracted about existing evaluations of interventions to reduce diagnostic error, identified by updating a previous systematic review.

RESULTS

Data were synthesized to create logic models for four types of intervention, addressing five causes of diagnostic error in seven stages in the diagnostic pathway. In total, 46 interventions from 43 studies were included and 24 different logic models were generated.

CONCLUSIONS

We used a novel approach to create a freely available library of logic models. The models highlight the importance of attending to what needs to occur before and after intervention delivery if the intervention is to be effective. Our work provides a useful starting point for intervention developers, helps evaluators identify intermediate outcomes, and provides a method to enable others to generate libraries for interventions targeting other errors.

Validation of an electronic trigger to measure missed diagnosis of stroke in emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic errors are major contributors to preventable patient harm. We validated the use of an electronic health record (EHR)-based trigger (e-trigger) to measure missed opportunities in stroke diagnosis in emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS

Using two frameworks, the Safer Dx Trigger Tools Framework and the Symptom-disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error Framework, we applied a symptom-disease pair-based e-trigger to identify patients hospitalized for stroke who, in the preceding 30 days, were discharged from the ED with benign headache or dizziness diagnoses. The algorithm was applied to Veteran Affairs National Corporate Data Warehouse on patients seen between 1/1/2016 and 12/31/2017. Trained reviewers evaluated medical records for presence/absence of missed opportunities in stroke diagnosis and stroke-related red-flags, risk factors, neurological examination, and clinical interventions. Reviewers also estimated quality of clinical documentation at the index ED visit.

RESULTS

We applied the e-trigger to 7,752,326 unique patients and identified 46,931 stroke-related admissions, of which 398 records were flagged as trigger-positive and reviewed. Of these, 124 had missed opportunities (positive predictive value for "missed" = 31.2%), 93 (23.4%) had no missed opportunity (non-missed), 162 (40.7%) were miscoded, and 19 (4.7%) were inconclusive. Reviewer agreement was high (87.3%, Cohen's kappa = 0.81). Compared to the non-missed group, the missed group had more stroke risk factors (mean 3.2 vs 2.6), red flags (mean 0.5 vs 0.2), and a higher rate of inadequate documentation (66.9% vs 28.0%).

CONCLUSION

In a large national EHR repository, a symptom-disease pair-based e-trigger identified missed diagnoses of stroke with a modest positive predictive value, underscoring the need for chart review validation procedures to identify diagnostic errors in large data sets.

Interventions targeted at reducing diagnostic error: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Incorrect, delayed and missed diagnoses can contribute to significant adverse health outcomes. Intervention options have proliferated in recent years necessitating an update to McDonald et al's 2013 systematic review of interventions to reduce diagnostic error.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To describe the types of published interventions for reducing diagnostic error that have been evaluated in terms of an objective patient outcome; (2) to assess the risk of bias in the included interventions and perform a sensitivity analysis of the findings; and (3) to determine the effectiveness of included interventions with respect to their intervention type.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2019. Publications were included if they delivered patient-related outcomes relating to diagnostic accuracy, management outcomes and/or morbidity and mortality. The interventions in each included study were categorised and analysed using the six intervention types described by McDonald et al (technique, technology-based system interventions, educational interventions, personnel changes, structured process changes and additional review methods).

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen of the 20 included studies (including three randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) demonstrated improvements in objective patient outcomes following the intervention. These three RCTs individually evaluated a technique-based intervention, a technology-based system intervention and a structured process change. The inclusion or exclusion of two higher risk of bias studies did not affect the results.

CONCLUSION

Technique-based interventions, technology-based system interventions and structured process changes have been the most studied interventions over the time period of this review and hence are seen to be effective in reducing diagnostic error. However, more high-quality RCTs are required, particularly evaluating educational interventions and personnel changes, to demonstrate the value of these interventions in diverse settings.

Clinical Decision Support Systems for Diagnosis in Primary Care: A Scoping Review

Diagnosis is one of the crucial tasks performed by primary care physicians; however, primary care is at high risk of diagnostic errors due to the characteristics and uncertainties associated with the field. Prevention of diagnostic errors in primary care requires urgent action, and one of the possible methods is the use of health information technology. Its modes such as clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have been demonstrated to improve the quality of care in a variety of medical settings, including hospitals and primary care centers, though its usefulness in the diagnostic domain is still unknown. We conducted a scoping review to confirm the usefulness of the CDSS in the diagnostic domain in primary care and to identify areas that need to be explored. Search terms were chosen to cover the three dimensions of interest: decision support systems, diagnosis, and primary care. A total of 26 studies were included in the review. As a result, we found that the CDSS and reminder tools have significant effects on screening for common chronic diseases; however, the CDSS has not yet been fully validated for the diagnosis of acute and uncommon chronic diseases. Moreover, there were few studies involving non-physicians.

The effect of electronic audits and feedback in primary care and factors that contribute to their effectiveness: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was (i) to assess whether electronic audit and feedback (A&F) is effective in primary care and (ii) to evaluate important features concerning content and delivery of the feedback in primary care, including the use of benchmarks, the frequency of feedback, the cognitive load of feedback and the evidence-based aspects of the feedback.

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases were searched for articles published since 2010 by replicating the search strategy used in the last Cochrane review on A&F.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent reviewers assessed the records for their eligibility, performed the data extraction and evaluated the risk of bias. Our search resulted in 8744 records, including the 140 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the last Cochrane Review. The full texts of 431 articles were assessed to determine their eligibility. Finally, 29 articles were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted standard data, data on the effectiveness and outcomes of the interventions, data on the kind of electronic feedback (static versus interactive) and data on the aforementioned feedback features.

RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-two studies (76%) showed that electronic A&F was effective. All interventions targeting medication safety, preventive medicine, cholesterol management and depression showed an effect. Approximately 70% of the included studies used benchmarks and high-quality evidence in the content of the feedback. In almost half of the studies, the cognitive load of feedback was not reported. Due to high heterogeneity in the results, no meta-analysis was performed.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review included 29 articles examining electronic A&F interventions in primary care, and 76% of the interventions were effective. Our findings suggest electronic A&F is effective in primary care for different conditions such as medication safety and preventive medicine. Some of the benefits of electronic A&F include its scalability and the potential to be cost effective. The use of benchmarks as comparators and feedback based on high-quality evidence are widely used and important features of electronic feedback in primary care. However, other important features such as the cognitive load of feedback and the frequency of feedback provision are poorly described in the design of many electronic A&F intervention, indicating that a better description or implementation of these features is needed. Developing a framework or methodology for automated A&F interventions in primary care could be useful for future research.

Low Rates of Colonoscopy Follow-up After a Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Medicaid Health Plan Delivered Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND

Follow-up colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is necessary for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to be effective. We report colonoscopy follow-up rates after a positive FIT overall and by population characteristics in the BeneFIT demonstration pilot, a Medicaid health insurance plan-delivered mailed FIT outreach program.

METHODS

In 2016, 2 health insurance plans in Oregon and in Washington state mailed FIT kits to Medicaid patients who, based on claims data, were overdue for CRC screening. We report follow-up colonoscopy completion rates after positive FIT, and differences in completion rates by age, sex, race, ethnicity, preferred language, and number of primary care visits in the prior year. This research was human subjects approved with a waiver of consent for data collection.

RESULTS

The FIT positivity rates in Health Plan Oregon and Health Plan Washington were 7.9% (39/488) and 14.6% (125/857), respectively. Colonoscopy completion rates within 12 months of the positive test were 35.9% (14/41) in Health Plan Oregon and 32.8% (41/125) in Health Plan Washington. Colonoscopy completion rates were higher among individuals who preferred a language other than English (Non-English speakers 70.0%, English speakers 31.3%, P = .04).

CONCLUSION

In a health plan-delivered mailed FIT outreach program, follow-up colonoscopy rates after a positive test were low. Additional interventions are needed to assure colonoscopy after a positive FIT test and to reap the benefits of screening.

Clinical prediction tools to identify patients at highest risk of myeloma in primary care: a retrospective open cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with myeloma experience substantial delays in their diagnosis, which can adversely affect their prognosis.

AIM

To generate a clinical prediction rule to identify primary care patients who are at highest risk of myeloma.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective open cohort study using electronic health records data from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2014.

METHOD

Patients from the CPRD were included in the study if they were aged ≥40 years, had two full blood counts within a year, and had no previous diagnosis of myeloma. Cases of myeloma were identified in the following 2 years. Derivation and external validation datasets were created based on geographical region. Prediction equations were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models including patient characteristics, symptoms, and blood test results. Calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility were evaluated in the validation set.

RESULTS

Of 1 281 926 eligible patients, 737 (0.06%) were diagnosed with myeloma within 2 years. Independent predictors of myeloma included: older age; male sex; back, chest and rib pain; nosebleeds; low haemoglobin, platelets, and white cell count; and raised mean corpuscular volume, calcium, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. A model including symptoms and full blood count had an area under the curve of 0.84 (95% CI = 0.81 to 0.87) and sensitivity of 62% (95% CI = 55% to 68%) at the highest risk decile. The corresponding statistics for a second model, which also included calcium and inflammatory markers, were an area under the curve of 0.87 (95% CI = 0.84 to 0.90) and sensitivity of 72% (95% CI = 66% to 78%).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of these prediction rules would highlight the possibility of myeloma in patients where GPs do not suspect myeloma. Future research should focus on the prospective evaluation of further external validity and the impact on clinical practice.

What Multilevel Interventions Do We Need to Increase the Colorectal Cancer Screening Rate to 80%?

Screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality; however, this remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States and adherence to colorectal cancer screening falls far short of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of 80%. Numerous studies have examined the effectiveness of interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening uptake. Outreach is the active dissemination of screening outside of the primary care setting, such as mailing fecal blood tests to individuals' homes. Navigation uses trained personnel to assist individuals through the screening process. Patient education may take the form of brochures, videos, or websites. Provider education can include feedback about screening rates of patient panels. Reminders to healthcare providers can be provided by dashboards of patients due for screening. Financial incentives provide monetary compensation to individuals when they complete screening tests, either as fixed payments or via a lottery. Individual preference for specific screening strategies has also been examined in several trials, with a choice of screening strategies yielding higher adherence than recommendation of a single strategy.

Electronic clinical decision support tool for assessing stomach symptoms in primary care (ECASS): a feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility of a definitive trial in primary care of electronic clinical decision support (eCDS) for possible oesophago-gastric (O-G) cancer.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Feasibility study in 42 general practices in two regions of England, cluster randomised controlled trial design without blinding, nested qualitative and health economic evaluation.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 55 years or older, presenting to their general practitioner (GP) with symptoms associated with O-G cancer. 530 patients (mean age 68 years, 58% female) participated.

INTERVENTION

Practices randomised 1:1 to usual care (control) or to receive a previously piloted eCDS tool for suspected cancer (intervention), for use at the discretion of the GPs, supported by a theory-based implementation package and ongoing support. We conducted semistructured interviews with GPs in intervention practices. Recruitment lasted 22 months.

OUTCOMES

Patient participation rate, use of eCDS, referrals and route to diagnosis, O-G cancer diagnoses; acceptability to GPs; cost-effectiveness. Participants followed up 6 months after index encounter.

RESULTS

From control and intervention practices, we screened 3841 and 1303 patients, respectively; 1189 and 434 were eligible, 392 and 138 consented to participate. Ten patients (1.9%) had O-G cancer. eCDS was used eight times in total by five unique users. GPs experienced interoperability problems between the eCDS tool and their clinical system and also found it did not fit with their workflow. Unexpected restrictions on software installation caused major problems with implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The conduct of this study was hampered by technical limitations not evident during an earlier pilot of the eCDS tool, and by regulatory controls on software installation introduced by primary care trusts early in the study. This eCDS tool needed to integrate better with clinical workflow; even then, its use for suspected cancer may be infrequent. Any definitive trial of eCDS for cancer diagnosis should only proceed after addressing these constraints.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN125595588.

The impact of health information technology on the management and follow-up of test results - a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of health information technology (IT) systems on clinicians' work practices and patient engagement in the management and follow-up of test results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search for studies reporting health IT systems and clinician test results management was conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, and Scopus from January 1999 to June 2018. Test results follow-up was defined as provider follow-up of results for tests that were sent to the laboratory and radiology services for processing or analysis.

RESULTS

There are some findings from controlled studies showing that health IT can improve the proportion of tests followed-up (15 percentage point change) and increase physician awareness of test results that require action (24-28 percentage point change). Taken as whole, however, the evidence of the impact of health IT on test result management and follow-up is not strong.

DISCUSSION

The development of safe and effective test results management IT systems should pivot on several axes. These axes include 1) patient-centerd engagement (involving shared, timely, and meaningful information); 2) diagnostic processes (that involve the integration of multiple people and different clinical settings across the health care spectrum); and 3) organizational communications (the myriad of multi- transactional processes requiring feedback, iteration, and confirmation) that contribute to the patient care process.

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence indicates that health IT in and of itself does not (and most likely cannot) provide a complete solution to issues related to test results management and follow-up.

CASNET2: evaluation of an electronic safety netting cancer toolkit for the primary care electronic health record: protocol for a pragmatic stepped-wedge RCT

INTRODUCTION

Safety-netting in primary care is the best practice in cancer diagnosis, ensuring that patients are followed up until symptoms are explained or have resolved. Currently, clinicians use haphazard manual solutions. The ubiquitous use of electronic health records provides an opportunity to standardise safety-netting practices.A new electronic safety-netting toolkit has been introduced to provide systematic ways to track and follow up patients. We will evaluate the effectiveness of this toolkit, which is embedded in a major primary care clinical system in England:Egerton Medical Information System(EMIS)-Web.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a stepped-wedge cluster RCT in 60 general practices within the RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) network. Groups of 10 practices will be randomised into the active phase at 2-monthly intervals over 12 months. All practices will be activated for at least 2 months. The primary outcome is the primary care interval measured as days between the first recorded symptom of cancer (within the year prior to diagnosis) and the subsequent referral to secondary care. Other outcomes include referrals rates and rates of direct access cancer investigation.Analysis of the clustered stepped-wedge design will model associations using a fixed effect for intervention condition of the cluster at each time step, a fixed effect for time and other covariates, and then include a random effect for practice and for patient to account for correlation between observations from the same centre and from the same participant.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from the North West-Greater Manchester West National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (REC Reference 19/NW/0692). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conferences, and sent to participating practices. They will be published on the University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Primary Care and RCGP RSC websites.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN15913081; Pre-results.

Operational measurement of diagnostic safety: state of the science

Reducing the incidence of diagnostic errors is increasingly a priority for government, professional, and philanthropic organizations. Several obstacles to measurement of diagnostic safety have hampered progress toward this goal. Although a coordinated national strategy to measure diagnostic safety remains an aspirational goal, recent research has yielded practical guidance for healthcare organizations to start using measurement to enhance diagnostic safety. This paper, concurrently published as an Issue Brief by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, issues a "call to action" for healthcare organizations to begin measurement efforts using data sources currently available to them. Our aims are to outline the state of the science and provide practical recommendations for organizations to start identifying and learning from diagnostic errors. Whether by strategically leveraging current resources or building additional capacity for data gathering, nearly all organizations can begin their journeys to measure and reduce preventable diagnostic harm.

Proven Strategies for Increasing Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented or detected early through screening and surveillance, barriers that lower adherence to screening significantly limit its effectiveness. Therefore, implementation of interventions that address and overcome adherence barriers is critical to efforts to decrease morbidity and mortality from CRC. This article reviews the current available evidence about interventions to increase adherence to CRC screening.

A Proposal to Improve the Early Diagnosis of Symptomatic Cancers in the United States

Many people are diagnosed with cancer after presenting with signs and symptoms of their disease to a healthcare provider. Research from developed countries suggests that, in addition to indicating later-stage disease, symptoms can also indicate earlier-stage disease, leading to investment in research and quality improvement efforts in the early detection of symptomatic cancers. This approach, labeled early diagnosis of symptomatic cancers, focuses on identifying cancer at the earliest possible stage in patients with potential signs and symptoms of cancer, and subsequently diagnosing and treating the cancer without delay. In the United States, early detection has focused on cancer screening, with relatively less research focused on early diagnosis of symptomatic cancers. In this commentary, we propose that research focused on early diagnosis of symptomatic cancers provides an important opportunity to achieve more earlier-stage cancer diagnoses in the United States. We highlight the potential of these efforts to improve cancer outcomes, and outline a research agenda to improve early diagnosis of symptomatic cancers in the United States focused on defining and describing pathways to cancer diagnosis, identifying signs and symptoms that can be used to promote early cancer detection, and developing interventions to improve early diagnosis of symptomatic cancers.

Assessment of Health Information Technology-Related Outpatient Diagnostic Delays in the US Veterans Affairs Health Care System: A Qualitative Study of Aggregated Root Cause Analysis Data

IMPORTANCE

Diagnostic delay in the outpatient setting is an emerging safety priority that health information technology (HIT) should help address. However, diagnostic delays have persisted, and new safety concerns associated with the use of HIT have emerged.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze HIT-related outpatient diagnostic delays within a large, integrated health care system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study involved qualitative content analysis of safety concerns identified in aggregated root cause analysis (RCA) data related to HIT and outpatient diagnostic delays. The setting was the US Department of Veterans Affairs using all RCAs submitted to the Veterans Affairs (VA) National Center for Patient Safety from January 1, 2013, to July 31, 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Common themes associated with the role of HIT-related safety concerns were identified and categorized according to the Health IT Safety framework for measuring, monitoring, and improving HIT safety. This framework includes 3 related domains (ie, safe HIT, safe use of HIT, and using HIT to improve safety) situated within an 8-dimensional sociotechnical model accounting for interacting technical and nontechnical variables associated with safety. Hence, themes identified enhanced understanding of the sociotechnical context and domain of HIT safety involved.

RESULTS

Of 214 RCAs categorized by the terms delay and outpatient submitted during the study period, 88 were identified as involving diagnostic delays and HIT, from which 172 unique HIT-related safety concerns were extracted (mean [SD], 1.97 [1.53] per RCA). Most safety concerns (82.6% [142 of 172]) involved problems with safe use of HIT, predominantly sociotechnical factors associated with people, workflow and communication, and a poorly designed human-computer interface. Fewer safety concerns involved problems with safe HIT (14.5% [25 of 172]) or using HIT to improve safety (0.3% [5 of 172]). The following 5 key high-risk areas for diagnostic delays emerged: managing electronic health record inbox notifications and communication, clinicians gathering key diagnostic information, technical problems, data entry problems, and failure of a system to track test results.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This qualitative study of a national RCA data set suggests that interventions to reduce outpatient diagnostic delays could aim to improve test result management, interoperability, data visualization, and order entry, as well as to decrease information overload.

Preventing Diagnostic Errors in Ambulatory Care: An Electronic Notification Tool for Incomplete Radiology Tests

BACKGROUND

Failure to complete recommended diagnostic tests may increase the risk of diagnostic errors.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate an electronic monitoring tool that notifies the responsible clinician of incomplete imaging tests for their ambulatory patients.

METHODS

A results notification workflow engine was created at an academic medical center. It identified future appointments for imaging studies and notified the ordering physician of incomplete tests by secure email. To assess the impact of the intervention, the project team surveyed participating physicians and measured test completion rates within 90 days of the scheduled appointment. Analyses compared test completion rates among patients of intervention and usual care clinicians at baseline and follow-up. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to control for secular trends and differences between cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 725 patients of 16 intervention physicians had 1,016 delayed imaging studies; 2,023 patients of 42 usual care clinicians had 2,697 delayed studies. In the first month, physicians indicated in 23/30 cases that they were unaware of the missed test prior to notification. The 90-day test completion rate was lower in the usual care than intervention group in the 6-month baseline period (18.8 vs. 22.1%, p = 0.119). During the 12-month follow-up period, there was a significant improvement favoring the intervention group (20.9 vs. 25.5%, p = 0.027). The change was driven by improved completion rates among patients referred for mammography (21.0 vs. 30.1%, p = 0.003). Multivariate analyses showed no significant impact of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

There was a temporal association between email alerts to physicians about missed imaging tests and improved test completion at 90 days, although baseline differences in intervention and usual care groups limited the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Research is needed to understand the potential benefits and limitations of missed test notifications to reduce the risk of delayed diagnoses, particularly in vulnerable patient populations.

[Information technology and eHealth to improve patient safety]

Patient safety is a key element of high-quality healthcare. Digitalization, new eHealth applications and data-based algorithms have high potential to make a significant contribution. This article presents current technological developments along a simplified patient journey from emergency medical triage, diagnosis and therapy to follow-up. The technical interventions are highly diverse and mostly accompanied by a low level of evidence, since most of them are from single academic projects or start-ups. Although there should be no doubt that technology is an important instrument for increasing patient safety, new technologies also involve new risks. Furthermore, technical measures must always be embedded in an overall concept of organizational measures, adequate education, training and accompanying research in order to generate the highest possible benefits and lowest possible risks.

The frequency, nature and impact of GP-assessed avoidable delays in a population-based cohort of cancer patients

BACKGROUND

There is a growing emphasis on the speed of diagnosis as an aspect of cancer prognosis. While epidemiological data in the last decade have quantified diagnostic timeliness and its variation, whether and how often prolonged diagnostic intervals can be considered avoidable is unknown.

METHODS

We used data from the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit (NCDA) on 17,042 patients diagnosed with cancer in 2014. Participating primary care physicians were asked to identify delays in diagnosis that they deemed avoidable, together with the 'setting' of the avoidable delay and key attributable factors. We used descriptive analysis and regression frameworks to assess validity and examine variation in the frequency and nature of avoidable delays.

RESULTS

Among 14,259 patients, 24% were deemed to have had an avoidable delay to their diagnosis. Patients with a reported avoidable delay had a longer median diagnostic interval (92 days) than those without (30 days). Of all avoidable delays, 13% were deemed to have occurred pre-consultation, 49% within primary care, and 38% within secondary care. Avoidable delays were mostly attributed to the test request/performance phase (25%). Multimorbidity was associated with greater odds of avoidable delay (OR for 3+ vs no comorbidity: 1.43 (95% CI 1.25-1.63)), with heterogeneous associations with cancer site.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that GP-identified instances of avoidable delay have construct validity. Whilst the causes of avoidable diagnostic delays are multi-factorial and occur in different settings and phases of the diagnostic process, their analysis can guide improvement initiatives and enable the examination of any prognostic implications.

Unscheduled Radiologic Examination Orders in the Electronic Health Record: A Novel Resource for Targeting Ambulatory Diagnostic Errors in Radiology

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of unscheduled radiologic examination orders in an electronic health record, and the proportion of unscheduled orders that are clinically necessary, by modality.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted from January to October 2016 at an academic institution. All unscheduled radiologic examination orders were retrieved for seven modalities (CT, MR, ultrasound, obstetric ultrasound, bone densitometry, mammography, and fluoroscopy). After excluding duplicates, 100 randomly selected orders from each modality were assigned to two physician reviewers who classified their clinical necessity, with 10% overlap. Interannotator agreement was assessed using κ statistics, the percentage of clinically necessary unscheduled orders was compared, and χ² analysis was used to assess differences by modality.

RESULTS

A total 494,503 radiologic examination orders were placed during the study period. After exclusions, 33,546 unscheduled orders were identified, 7% of all radiologic examination orders. Among 700 reviewed unscheduled orders, agreement was substantial (κ = 0.63). Eighty-seven percent of bone densitometric examinations and sixty-five percent of mammographic studies were considered clinically necessary, primarily for follow-up management. The majority of orders in each modality were clinically necessary, except for CT, obstetric ultrasound, and fluoroscopy (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Large numbers of radiologic examination orders remain unscheduled in the electronic health record. A substantial portion are clinically necessary, representing potential delays in executing documented provider care plans. Clinically unnecessary unscheduled orders may inadvertently be scheduled and performed. Identifying and performing clinically necessary unscheduled radiologic examination orders may help reduce diagnostic errors related to diagnosis and treatment delays and enhance patient safety, while eliminating clinically unnecessary unscheduled orders will help avoid unneeded testing.

Developing a cancer-specific trigger tool to identify treatment-related adverse events using administrative data

Background

As there are few validated tools to identify treatment‐related adverse events across cancer care settings, we sought to develop oncology‐specific “triggers” to flag potential adverse events among cancer patients using claims data.

Methods

322 887 adult patients undergoing an initial course of cancer‐directed therapy for breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer from 2008 to 2014 were drawn from a large commercial claims database. We defined 16 oncology‐specific triggers using diagnosis and procedure codes. To distinguish treatment‐related complications from comorbidities, we required a logical and temporal relationship between a treatment and the associated trigger. We tabulated the prevalence of triggers by cancer type and metastatic status during 1‐year of follow‐up, and examined cancer trigger risk factors.

Results

Cancer‐specific trigger events affected 19% of patients over the initial treatment year. The trigger burden varied by disease and metastatic status, from 6% of patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer to 41% and 50% of those with metastatic colorectal and lung cancers, respectively. The most prevalent triggers were abnormal serum bicarbonate, blood transfusion, non‐contrast chest CT scan following radiation therapy, and hypoxemia. Among patients with metastatic disease, 10% had one trigger event and 29% had two or more. Triggers were more common among older patients, women, non‐whites, patients with low family incomes, and those without a college education.

Conclusions

Oncology‐specific triggers offer a promising method for identifying potential patient safety events among patients across cancer care settings.

Understanding the roles of three academic communities in a prospective learning health ecosystem for diagnostic excellence

Inaccurate, untimely, and miscommunicated medical diagnoses represent a wicked problem requiring comprehensive and coordinated approaches, such as those demonstrated in the characteristics of learning health systems (LHSs). To appreciate a vision for how LHS methods can optimize processes and outcomes in medical diagnosis (diagnostic excellence), we interviewed 32 individuals with relevant expertise: 18 who have studied diagnostic processes using traditional behavioral science and health services research methods, six focused on machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) approaches, and eight multidisciplinary researchers experienced in advocating for and incorporating LHS methods, ie, scalable continuous learning in health care. We report on barriers and facilitators, identified by these subjects, to applying their methods toward optimizing medical diagnosis. We then employ their insights to envision the emergence of a learning ecosystem that leverages the tools of each of the three research groups to advance diagnostic excellence. We found that these communities represent a natural fit forward, in which together, they can better measure diagnostic processes and close the loop of putting insights into practice. Members of the three academic communities will need to network and bring in additional stakeholders before they can design and implement the necessary infrastructure that would support ongoing learning of diagnostic processes at an economy of scale and scope.

Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of cancer in primary care is complex and challenging. Electronic clinical decision support tools (eCDSTs) have been proposed as an approach to improve GP decision making, but no systematic review has examined their role in cancer diagnosis.

AIM

To investigate whether eCDSTs improve diagnostic decision making for cancer in primary care and to determine which elements influence successful implementation.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A systematic review of relevant studies conducted worldwide and published in English between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2018.

METHOD

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and a consultation of reference lists and citation tracking was carried out. Exclusion criteria included the absence of eCDSTs used in asymptomatic populations, and studies that did not involve support delivered to the GP. The most relevant Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were applied according to study design of the included paper.

RESULTS

Of the nine studies included, three showed improvements in decision making for cancer diagnosis, three demonstrated positive effects on secondary clinical or health service outcomes such as prescribing, quality of referrals, or cost-effectiveness, and one study found a reduction in time to cancer diagnosis. Barriers to implementation included trust, the compatibility of eCDST recommendations with the GP's role as a gatekeeper, and impact on workflow.

CONCLUSION

eCDSTs have the capacity to improve decision making for a cancer diagnosis, but the optimal mode of delivery remains unclear. Although such tools could assist GPs in the future, further well-designed trials of all eCDSTs are needed to determine their cost-effectiveness and the most appropriate implementation methods.

Quality of the diagnostic process in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of bladder or kidney cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

In urological cancers, sex disparity exists for survival, with women doing worse than men. Suboptimal evaluation of presenting symptoms may contribute.

DESIGN

We performed a systematic review examining factors affecting the quality of the diagnostic process of patients presenting with symptoms of bladder or kidney cancer.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 13 June 2019.

ELIGIBLE CRITERIA

We focused on one of the six domains of quality of healthcare: timeliness, and examined the quality of the diagnostic process more broadly, by assessing whether guideline-concordant history, examination, tests and referrals were performed. Studies describing the factors that affect the timeliness or quality of the assessment of urinary tract infections, haematuria and lower urinary tract symptoms in the context of bladder or kidney cancer, were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction and quality assessment were independently performed by two authors. Due to the heterogeneity of study design and outcomes, the results could not be pooled. A narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

28 studies met review criteria, representing 583 636 people from 9 high-income countries. Studies were based in primary care (n=8), specialty care (n=12), or both (n=8). Up to two-thirds of patients with haematuria received no further evaluation in the 6 months after their initial visit. Urinary tract infections, nephrolithiasis and benign prostatic conditions before cancer diagnosis were associated with diagnostic delay. Women were more likely to experience diagnostic delay than men. Patients who first saw a urologist were less likely to experience delayed evaluation and cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Women, and patients with non-cancerous urological diagnoses just prior to their cancer diagnosis, were more likely to experience lower quality diagnostic processes. Risk prediction tools, and improving guideline ambiguity, may improve outcomes and reduce sex disparity in survival for these cancers.

Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review

Background

To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and communication strategies to reduce diagnostic errors made by clinicians.

Methods

MEDLINE complete, CINHAL complete, EMBASE, PSNet and Google Advanced. Electronic and manual search of articles on audit systems and communication strategies or interventions, searched for papers published between January 1990 and April 2017. We included studies with interventions implemented by clinicians in a clinical environment with real patients.

Results

A total of 2431 articles were screened of which 26 studies met inclusion criteria. Data extraction was conducted by two groups, each group comprising two independent reviewers. Articles were classified by communication (6) or audit strategies (20) to reduce diagnostic error in clinical settings. The most common interventions were delivered as technology-based systems n = 16 (62%) and within an acute care setting n = 15 (57%). Nine studies reported randomised controlled trials. Three RCT studies on communication interventions and 3 RCTs on audit strategies found the interventions to be effective in reducing diagnostic errors.

Conclusion

Despite numerous studies on interventions targeting diagnostic errors, our analyses revealed limited evidence on interventions being practically used in clinical settings and a bias of studies originating from the US (n = 19, 73% of included studies). There is some evidence that trigger algorithms, including computer based and alert systems, may reduce delayed diagnosis and improve diagnostic accuracy. In trauma settings, strategies such as additional patient review (e.g. trauma teams) reduced missed diagnosis and in radiology departments review strategies such as team meetings and error documentation may reduce diagnostic error rates over time.

Trial registration

The systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42017067056.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving the Timely Detection of Bladder and Kidney Cancer in Primary Care

Bladder and kidney cancer are the 10th and 7th most common cancers in the United Kingdom (UK). They present with symptoms that are typically investigated via the same diagnostic pathway. However, diagnosing these cancers can be challenging, especially for kidney cancer, as many of the symptoms are non-specific and occur commonly in patients without cancer. Furthermore, the recognition and evaluation of these symptoms may differ because of the lack of supporting high-quality evidence to inform management, a problem also reflected in currently ambiguous guidelines. The majority of these two cancers are diagnosed following a referral from a general practitioner. In this article, we summarise current UK and United States (US) guidelines for investigating common symptoms of bladder and kidney cancer-visible haematuria, non-visible haematuria and urinary tract infections. Our article aims to support clinicians in recognising and investigating patients with symptoms of possible bladder and kidney cancer in a timely fashion. We discuss challenges during the diagnostic process and possible future interventions for improvement.

Two Decades Since To Err Is Human: An Assessment Of Progress And Emerging Priorities In Patient Safety

The Institute of Medicine's To Err Is Human, published in 1999, represented a watershed moment for the US health care system. The report dramatically raised the profile of patient safety and stimulated dedicated research funding to this essential aspect of patient care. Highly effective interventions have since been developed and adopted for hospital-acquired infections and medication safety, although the impact of these interventions varies because of their inconsistent implementation and practice. Progress in addressing other hospital-acquired adverse events has been variable. In the past two decades additional areas of safety risk have been identified and targeted for intervention, such as outpatient care, diagnostic errors, and the use of health information technology. In sum, the frequency of preventable harm remains high, and new scientific and policy approaches to address both prior and emerging risk areas are imperative. With the increasing availability of electronic data, investments must now be made in developing and testing methods to routinely and continuously measure the frequency and types of patient harm and even predict risk of harm for specific patients. This progress could lead us from a Bronze Age of rudimentary tool development to a Golden Era of vast improvement in patient safety.

Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines are summarized, and the most current data from the National Health Interview Survey are provided on the utilization of cancer screening for men and women and on the adherence of men and women to multiple recommended screening tests.

Timely Interventions for Children with ADHD through Web-Based Monitoring Algorithms

The aim of this study was to evaluate an automated trigger algorithm designed to detect potentially adverse events in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), who were monitored remotely between visits. We embedded a trigger algorithm derived from parent-reported ADHD rating scales within an electronic patient monitoring system. We categorized clinicians’ alert resolution outcomes and compared Vanderbilt ADHD rating scale scores between patients who did or did not have triggered alerts. A total of 146 out of 1738 parent reports (8%) triggered alerts for 98 patients. One hundred and eleven alerts (76%) required immediate clinician review. Nurses successfully contacted parents for 68 (61%) of actionable alerts; 46% (31/68) led to a change in care plan prior to the next scheduled appointment. Compared to patients without alerts, patients with alerts demonstrated worsened ADHD severity (β = 5.8, 95% CI: 3.5–8.1 [p < 0.001] within 90 days prior to an alert. The trigger algorithm facilitated timely changes in the care plan in between face-to-face visits.