Interventions to Improve Follow-up of Positive Results on Fecal Blood Tests: A Systematic Review

Multilevel intervention for follow-up of abnormal FIT in the safety-net: IMProving Adherence to Colonoscopy through Teams and Technology (IMPACTT)

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is a widely used first step for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Abnormal FIT results require a colonoscopy for screening completion and CRC diagnosis, but the rate of timely colonoscopy is low, especially among patients in safety-net settings. Multi-level factors at the clinic- and patient-levels influence colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT. Our study aims to implement a multi-level approach consisting of a clinic- and patient-level intervention to improve the completion of diagnostic colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT.

METHODS

We will test a multilevel intervention with one safety-net system across 12 primary care clinics - a clinic-level intervention using a stepped wedge design and a patient-level intervention with patient-level randomization. At the clinic level, we will implement a "best practices bundle" to improve workflow for primary care providers and staff using a stepped-wedge design. At the patient level, we will randomize 2000 patients to receive text messages and call reminders or usual care.

RESULTS

For the main analysis, we will use a mixed effects logistic model to assess the impact of the clinic intervention on the primary outcome (completion of colonoscopy within 180 days after abnormal FIT). Secondary outcomes include median days to colonoscopy completion, rate of referral to colonoscopy at 42 days, rate of scheduled colonoscopy at 56 days, and bowel preparation quality at colonoscopy.

DISCUSSION

This study will assess the extent to which a multi-level intervention can improve timely colonoscopy completion in a diverse patient population cared for in a safety-net setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT, NCT06191185. Registered 20 December 2023, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06191185.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy after a positive non-invasive screening test for colorectal cancer in two Indiana healthcare systems

Objective

To describe trends in the use of non-invasive tests (NIST) and the interval between a positive NIST and diagnostic colonoscopy.

Methods

Using a retrospective time-trend design, we examined medical records of patients within two large Indiana integrated healthcare systems who had a positive NIST between January 2019 and June 2021 and quantified the proportion of patients who had not completed colonoscopy within 60, 90, and 180 days to determine the interval between NIST result and diagnostic colonoscopy in days.

Results

Of 1379 patients with positive NISTs, 930 (68 %) underwent diagnostic colonoscopy during the 30-month study timeframe. Median time to colonoscopy completion was significantly longer in 2020 compared to 2019 (50 vs. 37 days, p < 0.01) and 2021 (46 days, p = 0.06). The proportion of patients completing colonoscopy within 90 days of a positive FIT in 2019, 2020, and 2021 were 79 %, 83 %, and 72 %, respectively (p = 0.63), and were 86 %, 78 %, and 84 %, respectively, after positive FIT/DNA (p = 0.07). Median time to diagnostic colonoscopy completion was significantly longer in 2020, likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

Studies of outcomes in those who declined or delayed colonoscopy in 2020 are needed to estimate the potential subsequent colorectal cancer disease burden.

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

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

MAIN MEASURES

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

KEY RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Added Value of Medical Subject Headings Terms in Search Strategies of Systematic Reviews: Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

The massive increase in the number of published scientific articles enhances knowledge but makes it more complicated to summarize results. The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) thesaurus was created in the mid-20th century with the aim of systematizing article indexing and facilitating their retrieval. Despite the advent of search engines, few studies have questioned the relevance of the MeSH thesaurus, and none have done so systematically.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate the added value of using MeSH terms in PubMed queries for systematic reviews (SRs).

METHODS

SRs published in 4 high-impact medical journals in general medicine over the past 10 years were selected. Only SRs for which a PubMed query was provided were included. Each query was transformed to obtain 3 versions: the original query (V1), the query with free-text terms only (V2), and the query with MeSH terms only (V3). These 3 queries were compared with each other based on their sensitivity and positive predictive values.

RESULTS

In total, 59 SRs were included. The suppression of MeSH terms had an impact on the number of relevant articles retrieved for 24 (41%) out of 59 SRs. The median (IQR) sensitivities of queries V1 and V2 were 77.8% (62.1%-95.2%) and 71.4% (42.6%-90%), respectively. V1 queries provided an average of 2.62 additional relevant papers per SR compared with V2 queries. However, an additional 820.29 papers had to be screened. The cost of screening an additional collected paper was therefore 313.09, which was slightly more than triple the mean reading cost associated with V2 queries (88.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results revealed that removing MeSH terms from a query decreases sensitivity while slightly increasing the positive predictive value. Queries containing both MeSH and free-text terms yielded more relevant articles but required screening many additional papers. Despite this additional workload, MeSH terms remain indispensable for SRs.

Optimizing tracking and completion of follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal stool tests at health systems participating in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program

PURPOSE

We present findings from an assessment of award recipients' partners from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). We describe partners' processes of identifying and tracking patients undergoing stool-based screening.

METHODS

We analyzed data from eight CRCCP award recipients purposively sampled and their partner health systems from 2019 to 2023. The data included number of stool-based tests distributed and returned; abnormal findings; referrals and completion of follow-up colonoscopies; and colonoscopy findings. We also report on strategies to improve tracking of stool-based tests and facilitation of follow-up colonoscopies.

RESULTS

Five of eight CRCCP award recipients reported that all or some partner health systems were able to report stool test return rates. Six had health systems that were able to report abnormal stool test findings. Two reported that health systems could track time to follow-up colonoscopy completion from date of referral, while four could report colonoscopy completion but not the timeframe. Follow-up colonoscopy completion varied substantially from 24.2 to 75.5% (average of 47.9%). Strategies to improve identifying and tracking screening focused mainly on the use of electronic medical records; strategies to facilitate follow-up colonoscopy were multi-level.

CONCLUSION

Health systems vary in their ability to track steps in the stool-based screening process and few health systems can track time to completion of follow-up colonoscopy. Longer time intervals can result in more advanced disease. CRCCP-associated health systems participating in this study could support the implementation of multicomponent strategies at the individual, provider, and health system levels to improve tracking and completion of follow-up colonoscopy.

Impact of racial disparities in follow-up and quality of colonoscopy on colorectal cancer outcomes

BACKGROUND

The benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs rely on completing follow-up colonoscopy when a noncolonoscopy test is abnormal and on quality of colonoscopy screening as measured by the endoscopists' adenoma detection rate. Existing data demonstrate substantially lower follow-up colonoscopy rates and adenoma detection rate for Black Americans than White Americans. However, the contributions of racial differences in follow-up colonoscopy and adenoma detection rate on CRC outcomes have not been rigorously evaluated.

METHODS

We used established and validated CRC-Adenoma Incidence and Mortality (CRC-AIM) model as our analysis platform, with inputs from published literature that report lower follow-up colonoscopy rates and adenoma detection rate in Black adults compared with White adults (15% and 10% lower, respectively). We simulated screening with annual fecal immunochemical test, triennial multitarget stool DNA, and colonoscopy every 10 years between ages 45 and 75 years using real-world utilization of the screening modalities vs no screening. We reported lifetime outcomes per 1000 Black adults.

RESULTS

Elimination of Black-White disparities in follow-up colonoscopy rates would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 5.2% and 9.3%, respectively, and improve life-years gained with screening by 3.4%. Elimination of Black-White disparities in endoscopists' adenoma detection rate would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 9.4% and improve life-years gained by 3.7%. Elimination of both disparities would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 14.6% and 18.7%, respectively, and improve life-years gained by 7.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

This modeling study predicts eliminating racial differences in follow-up colonoscopy rates, and quality of screening colonoscopy would substantially reduce Black-White disparities in CRC incidence and mortality.

Perceptions of the Impact of Comorbidity on the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Qualitative Study With Bowel Screening Participants and Staff

INTRODUCTION

The impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening is currently unknown. We explored the impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening perceptions, experience and clinical management decisions following a positive stool test.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted remotely with Bowel Screening Wales staff (n = 16) stratified by regional location and role and with screening participants (n = 19) stratified by age, gender and comorbidity. Interview topics were guided by the Common-Sense Model.

RESULTS

Screening participants, regardless of comorbidity status, placed great emphasis on the importance of early detection of cancer and completing the bowel screening process. Screening staff emphasised comorbidities in the clinical decision-making process; however, screening participants had low awareness of the impact that comorbidities can have on bowel screening. Participants describe how the presence of multiple health conditions can mask potential bowel symptoms and influence beliefs about follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Bowel screening staff try to individualise the service to meet participant needs. The potential mismatch in screening staff and participant awareness and expectations of the bowel screening and diagnostic process needs to be addressed. Clearer and more regular communication with screening participants could support the screening process, particularly for those with significant coexisting health conditions or facing time delays. The possible masking effects and misattribution of symptoms because of comorbidities highlight an opportunity for education and raising awareness for screening participants and a potential area of focus for discussions in clinical consultations and staff training.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Project funding included costs for patients and public contributors to be compensated for their contributions to the project, in line with current standards. A patient and public contributor was involved in the design of the study, including protocol development, and the interpretation of key findings and implications for patients, which are subsequently reflected within the manuscript.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death. Screening has been proven to reduce both cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality. Various screening tests are available, each with their own advantages and disadvantages and varying levels of evidence to support their use. Clinicians should offer CRC screening to average-risk persons aged 50 to 75 years; starting screening at age 45 years remains controversial. Screening may be beneficial in select persons aged 76 to 85 years, based on their overall health and screening history. Offering a choice of screening tests or sequentially offering an alternate test for those who do not complete screening can significantly increase participation.

Development of a Follow-Up Measure to Ensure Complete Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Importance

The current quality performance measure for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is limited to initial screening. Despite low rates, there is no measure for appropriate follow-up with colonoscopy after receipt of an abnormal result of a stool-based screening test (SBT) for CRC. A quality performance measure is needed.

Objective

To develop and test a quality performance measure for follow-up colonoscopy within 6 months of an abnormal result of an SBT for CRC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective quality improvement study examined data from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, with 2018 plus 6 months of follow-up as the primary measurement period to verify performance rates, specify a potential measure, and test for validity, reliability, and feasibility. The Optum Labs Data Warehouse (OLDW), a deidentified database of health care claims and clinical data, was accessed. The OLDW contains longitudinal health information on enrollees and patients, representing a diverse mixture of ages and geographic regions across the US. For the database study, adults from 38 health care organizations (HCOs) aged 50 to 75 years who completed an initial CRC SBT with an abnormal result were observed to determine follow-up colonoscopy rates within 6 months. Rates were stratified by race, ethnicity, sex, insurance, and test modality. Three HCOs participated in the feasibility field testing. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcome consisted of follow-up colonoscopy rates following an abnormal SBT result for CRC. Reliability statistics were also calculated across HCOs, race, ethnicity, and measurement year.

Results

Among 20 581 adults (48.6% men and 51.4% women; 307 [1.5%] Asian, 492 [7.2%] Black, 644 [3.1%] Hispanic, and 17 705 [86.0%] White; mean [SD] age, 63.6 [7.1] years) in 38 health systems, 47.9% had a follow-up colonoscopy following an abnormal SBT result for CRC within 6 months. There was significant variation between HCOs. Notably, significantly fewer Black patients (37.1% [95% CI, 34.6%-39.5%]) and patients with Medicare (49.2% [95% CI, 47.7%-50.6%]) or Medicaid (39.2% [95% CI, 36.3%-42.1%]) insurance received a follow-up colonoscopy. A quality performance measure that tracks rates of follow-up within 6 months of an abnormal SBT result was observed to be feasible, valid, and reliable, with a median reliability statistic between HCOs of 94.5% (range, 74.3%-99.7%).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this observational study of 20 581 adults suggest that a measure of follow-up colonoscopy within defined periods after an abnormal result of an SBT test for CRC is warranted based on low current performance rates and would be feasible to collect by health systems and produce valid, reliable results.

Limited English proficiency and reported receipt of colorectal cancer screening among adults 45-75 in 2019 and 2021

Introduction

Substantial barriers to screening exist for medically underserved populations, especially adults with limited English proficiency (LEP). We examined the proportion of US adults aged 45-75 up-to-date with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by LEP after 2018. The American Cancer Society began recommending CRC screening for adults 45-49 in 2018.

Methods

We analyzed cross-sectional data of adults 45-75 years old participating in the 2019 or 2021 National Health Interview Survey (N = 25,611). Adults were considered up-to-date with screening if they reported any stool test within 1 year, stool-DNA testing within 3 years, or colonoscopy within 10 years. Adults who interviewed in a language other than English were considered to have LEP. Adults not up-to-date with screening were asked if a healthcare professional (HCP) recommended screening, and if so which test(s). Regression models conducted in 2022-2023 evaluated receipt of screening, adjusting for sociodemographics, year, and healthcare access.

Results

Overall, 54.0 % (95 % CI 53.1-54.9 %) of participants were up-to-date with screening (9.4 % aged 45-49 vs 75.5 % aged 65-75); prevalence increased from 2019 (52.9 %) to 2021(55.2 %). Adults with LEP (vs English proficiency) were less likely to be up-to-date with screening (31.6 % vs. 56.8 %, [aPR 0.86 (0.77-0.96)]). Among adults not up-to-date, 15.0 % reported their HCP recommended screening (8.4 % among adults with LEP).

Conclusions

Nearly half of US adults were not up-to-date with CRC screening in 2019 and 2021 and few reported being recommended screening. Adults with LEP and those 45-49 were least likely to be screened suggesting targeted interventions are needed for these populations.

Unsatisfactory Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Prevalence, Reasons, and Subsequent Testing

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is an effective colorectal cancer screening modality. Little is known about prevalence, reasons, and testing after unsatisfactory FIT, or a FIT that cannot be processed by the laboratory due to inadequate stool specimen or incomplete labeling.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study examined unsatisfactory FIT among average-risk individuals aged 50-74 years in a large, integrated, safety-net health system who completed an index FIT from 2010 to 2019. We determined prevalence of unsatisfactory FIT and categorized reasons hierarchically. We used multivariable logistic regression models to identify factors associated with: (i) unsatisfactory FIT; and (ii) subsequent testing within 15 months of the unsatisfactory FIT.

RESULTS

Of 56,980 individuals completing an index FIT, 10.2% had an unsatisfactory FIT. Reasons included inadequate specimen (51%), incomplete labeling (27%), old specimen (13%), and broken/leaking container (8%). Unsatisfactory FIT was associated with being male [OR, 1.10; confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.16], Black (OR, 1.46; CI, 1.33-1.61), Spanish speaking (OR, 1.12; CI, 1.01-1.24), on Medicaid (OR, 1.42; CI, 1.28-1.58), and received FIT by mail (OR, 2.66; CI, 2.35-3.01). Among those with an unsatisfactory FIT, fewer than half (41%) completed a subsequent test within 15 months (median, 4.4 months). Adults aged 50-54 years (OR, 1.16; CI, 1.01-1.39) and those who received FIT by mail (OR, 1.92; CI, 1.49-2.09) were more likely to complete a subsequent test.

CONCLUSIONS

One in ten returned a FIT that could not be processed, mostly due to patient-related reasons. Fewer than half completed a subsequent test after unsatisfactory FIT.

IMPACT

Screening programs should address these breakdowns such as specimen collection and labeling to improve real-world effectiveness. See related In the Spotlight, p. 183.

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

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Hub-and-Spoke centralized intervention to optimize colorectal cancer screening and follow-up: A pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend screening for colorectal cancer (CRC), but participation and abnormal test follow up rates are suboptimal, with disparities by demography. Evidence-based interventions exist to promote screening, but community adoption and implementation are limited.

METHODS

The San Diego Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) program is an academic-community partnership testing regional implementation of a Hub-and-Spoke model for increasing CRC screening and follow-up. The "hub" is a non-academic, non-profit organization that includes 17 community health center (CHC) systems, serving over 190 rural and urban clinic sites. The "spokes" are 3 CHC systems that oversee 11-28 clinics each, totaling over 60 clinics. Using a cluster-randomized trial design, 9 clinics were randomized to intervention and 16 to usual care. Within intervention clinics, approximately 5000 eligible patients not up-to-date with CRC screening per year were identified for intervention. Interventions include an invitation primer, a mailed fecal immunochemical test with completion instructions, and phone and text-based reminders (hub) and patient navigation protocol to promote colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT (spoke). Outcomes include: 1) proportion of patients up-to-date with screening after three years in intervention versus non-intervention clinics; 2) proportion of patients with abnormal FIT completing colonoscopy within six months of the abnormal result. Implementation science measures are collected to assess acceptability, intervention and usual care adaptations, and sustainability of the intervention strategies.

CONCLUSION

This large-scale, regional cluster randomized trial among CHCs serving diverse populations is anticipated to accelerate progress in CRC prevention in underserved populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04941300.

Blood Test Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening in Persons Who Declined Colonoscopy and Fecal Immunochemical Test: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The septin 9 blood test is indicated for colorectal cancer screening in individuals who decline first-line tests, but participation in this context is unclear. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare reoffering colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) alone versus also offering the blood test among individuals who declined colonoscopy and FIT.

METHODS

Screen-eligible Veterans aged 50-75 years who declined colonoscopy and FIT within the previous 6 months were randomized to letter and telephone outreach to reoffer screening with colonoscopy/FIT only (control), or additionally offering the blood test as a second-line option (intervention). The primary outcome was completion of any screening test within 6 months. The secondary outcome was completion of a full screening strategy within 6 months, including colonoscopy for those with a positive noninvasive test.

RESULTS

Of 359 participants who completed follow-up, 9.6% in the control group and 17.1% in the intervention group completed any screening (7.5% difference; P = .035). Uptake of colonoscopy and FIT was similar in the 2 groups. The full screening strategy was completed in 9.0% and 14.9% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (5.9% difference; P = .084).

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals who previously declined colonoscopy and FIT, offering a blood test as a secondary option increased screening by 7.5% without decreasing uptake of first-line screening options. However, completion of a full screening strategy did not increase. These findings indicate that a blood test is a promising method to improve colorectal cancer screening, but obtaining a timely colonoscopy after a positive noninvasive test remains a challenge (ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT03598166).

Rationale for organized Colorectal cancer screening programs

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major health problem and it is expected that the number of persons diagnosed with CRC and CRC-related deaths will continue to increase. However, recent years have shown reductions in CRC incidence and mortality particularly among individuals aged 50 years and older which can be attributed to screening, improvements in patients' management, closer adherence to treatment guideline recommendations and a higher utilization of curative surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has concluded that there has been sufficient evidence that biennially screening using a stool-test or once-only endoscopy screening reduces CRC-related mortality. In Europe, between 2008 and 2018, nine countries have successfully implemented a population-based organized program and another six are in the roll-out phase. Population-based organized programs show higher screening participation rates and lower lack of compliance to follow-up testing after a positive screen test compared to opportunistic screening. Moreover, organized programs aim to provide high quality screening thereby reducing the risk of the harms of screening, including over-screening, and complications of screening, and poor follow-up of those who test positive. We describe how population-based organized CRC screening programs are preferred, since they reflect a more appropriate utilization of available resources, reduce inequities in access, and can integrate interventions addressing barriers to screening at the individual and health system levels.

The use of artificial intelligence to identify subjects with a positive FOBT predicted to be non-compliant with both colonoscopy and harbor cancer

BACKGROUND

Subjects with a positive Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) that are non-compliant with colonoscopy are at increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). Yet, in clinical practice, many remain non-compliant.

AIMS

To evaluate whether machine learning models (ML) can identify subjects with a positive FOBT predicted to be both non-compliant with colonoscopy within six months and harbor CRC (defined as the "target population").

METHODS

We trained and validated ML models based on extensive administrative and laboratory data about subjects with a positive FOBT between 2011 and 2013 within Clalit Health that were followed for cancer diagnosis up to 2018.

RESULTS

Out of 25,219 included subjects, 9,979(39.6%) were non-compliant with colonoscopy, and 202(0.8%) were both non-compliant and harbored cancer. Using ML, we reduced the number of subjects needed to engage from 25,219 to either 971 (3.85%) to identify 25.8%(52/202) of the target population, reducing the number needed to treat (NNT) from 124.8 to 19.4 or to 4,010(15,8%) to identify 55.0%(52/202) of the target population, NNT = 39.7.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning technology may help healthcare organizations to identify subjects with a positive FOBT predicted to be both non-compliant with colonoscopy and harbor cancer from the first day of a positive FOBT with improved efficiency.

Reach and effectiveness of a centralized navigation program for patients with positive fecal immunochemical tests requiring follow-up colonoscopy

Completion rates for follow-up colonoscopies after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are suboptimal in federally qualified health center (FQHC) settings. We implemented a screening intervention that included mailed FIT outreach to North Carolina FQHC patients from June 2020 to September 2021 and centralized patient navigation to support patients with abnormal FITs in completing follow-up colonoscopy. We evaluated the reach and effectiveness of navigation using electronic medical record data and navigator call logs detailing interactions with patients. Reach assessments included the proportion of patients successfully contacted by phone and who agreed to participate in navigation, intensity of navigation provided (including types of barriers to colonoscopy identified and total navigation time), and differences in these measures by socio-demographic characteristics. Effectiveness outcomes included colonoscopy completion, timeliness of follow-up colonoscopy (i.e., within 9 months), and bowel prep adequacy. Among 514 patients who completed a mailed FIT, 38 patients had an abnormal result and were eligible for navigation. Of these, 26 (68%) accepted navigation, 7 (18%) declined, and 5 (13%) could not be contacted. Among navigated patients, 81% had informational needs, 38% had emotional barriers, 35% had financial barriers, 12% had transportation barriers, and 42% had multiple barriers to colonoscopy. Median navigation time was 48.5 min (range: 24-277 min). Colonoscopy completion differed across groups - 92% of those accepting navigation completed colonoscopy within 9 months, versus 43% for those declining navigation. We found that centralized navigation was widely accepted in FQHC patients with abnormal FIT, and was an effective strategy, resulting in high colonoscopy completion rates.

Effects of Non-monetary Incentives in Physician Groups-A Systematic Review

Objectives: Healthcare expenditures in western countries have been rising for many years. This leads many countries to develop and test new reimbursement systems. A systematic review about monetary incentives in group settings indicated that a sole focus on monetary aspects does not necessarily result in better care at lower costs. Hence, this systematic review aims to describe the effects of non- monetary incentives in physician groups. Methods: We searched the databases MEDLINE (PubMed), The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit, and ISI Web of Science. Grey literature search, reference lists, and authors' personal collection provided additional sources. Results: Overall, we included 36 studies. We identified 4 categories of interventions related to non-monetary incentives. In particular, the category of decision support achieved promising results. However, design features vary among different decision support systems. To enable effective design, we provide an overview of the features applied by the studies included. Conclusions: Not every type of non-monetary incentive has a positive impact on quality of care in physician group settings. Thus, creating awareness among decision-makers regarding this matter and extending research on this topic can contribute to preventing implementation of ineffective incentives, and consequently, allocate resources towards tools that add value.

Characteristics of patient navigation programs in the Cancer Moonshot ACCSIS colorectal cancer screening initiative

BACKGROUND

Although patient navigation has shown promise for increasing participation in colorectal cancer screening and follow-up, little evidence is available to guide implementation of patient navigation in clinical practice. We characterize 8 patient navigation programs being implemented as part of multi-component interventions of the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Moonshot Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) initiative.

METHODS

We developed a data collection template organized by ACCSIS framework domains. The template was populated by a representative from each of the 8 ACCSIS research projects. We report standardized descriptions of 1) the socio-ecological context in which the navigation program was being conducted, 2) navigation program characteristics, 3) activities undertaken to facilitate program implementation (eg, training), and 4) outcomes used in program evaluation.

RESULTS

ACCSIS patient navigation programs varied broadly in their socio-ecological context and settings, the populations they served, and how they were implemented in practice. Six research projects adapted and implemented evidence-based patient navigation programs; the remaining projects developed new programs. Five projects began navigation when patients were due for initial colorectal cancer screening; 3 projects began navigation later in the screening process, when patients were due for follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal stool-test result. Seven projects relied on existing clinical staff to deliver the navigation; 1 hired a centralized research navigator. All project researchers plan to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of their programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our detailed program descriptions may facilitate cross-project comparisons and guide future implementation and evaluation of patient navigation programs in clinical practice.

Equitable Implementation of Mailed Stool Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening and Patient Navigation in a Safety Net Health System

BACKGROUND

Mailed stool testing programs increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in diverse settings, but whether uptake differs by key demographic characteristics is not well-studied and has health equity implications.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the uptake and equity of the first cycle of a mailed stool test program implemented over a 3-year period in a Central Texas Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) system.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study within a single-arm intervention.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients in an FQHC aged 50-75 at average CRC risk identified through electronic health records (EHR) as not being up to date with screening.

INTERVENTIONS

Mailed outreach in English/Spanish included an introductory letter, free-of-charge fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and lab requisition with postage-paid mailer, simple instructions, and a medical records update postcard. Patients were asked to complete the FIT or postcard reporting recent screening. One text and one letter reminded non-responders. A bilingual patient navigator guided those with positive FIT toward colonoscopy.

MAIN MEASURES

Proportions of patients completing mailed FIT in response to initial cycle of outreach and proportion of those with positive FIT completing colonoscopy; comparison of whether proportions varied by demographics and insurance status obtained from the EHR.

KEY RESULTS

Over 3 years, 33,606 patients received an initial cycle of outreach. Overall, 19.9% (n = 6672) completed at least one mailed FIT, 5.6% (n = 374) tested positive during that initial cycle, and 72.5% (n = 271 of 374) of those with positive FIT completed a colonoscopy. Hispanic/Latinx, Spanish-speaking, and uninsured patients were more likely to complete mailed FIT compared with white, English-speaking, and commercially insured patients. Spanish-speaking patients were more likely to complete colonoscopy after positive FIT compared with English-speaking patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Mailed FIT outreach with patient navigation implemented in an FQHC system was effective in equitably reaching patients not up to date for CRC screening.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

Changes in Cancer Screening in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Health care was disrupted in the US during the first quarter of 2020 with the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Early reports in selected samples suggested that cancer screening services decreased greatly, but population-based estimates of cancer screening prevalence during 2020 have not yet been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in breast cancer (BC), cervical cancer (CC), and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence with contemporary national, population-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This survey study included respondents from the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 BRFSS surveys who were eligible for BC (women aged 50-74 years), CC (women aged 25-64 years), and CRC (women and men aged 50-75 years) screening. Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to February 2022.

EXPOSURES

Calendar year.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Self-reported receipt of a recent (defined as in the past year) BC, CC, and CRC screening test. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) comparing 2020 vs 2018 prevalence and 95% CIs were computed.

RESULTS

In total, 479 248 individuals were included in the analyses of BC screening, 301 453 individuals were included in CC screening, and 854 210 individuals were included in CRC screening, In 2020, among respondents aged 50 to 75 years, 14 815 (11.4%) were Black, 12 081 (12.6%) were Hispanic, 156 198 (67.3%) were White, and 79 234 (29.9%) graduated from college (all percentages are weighted). After 4 years (2014-2018) of nearly steady prevalence, past-year BC screening decreased by 6% between 2018 and 2020 (from 61.6% in 2018 to 57.8% in 2020; aPR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96), and CC screening decreased by 11% (from 58.3% in 2018 to 51.9% in 2020; aPR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.87-0.91). The magnitude of these decreases was greater in people with lower educational attainment and Hispanic persons. CRC screening prevalence remained steady; past-year stool testing increased by 7% (aPR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12), offsetting a 16% decrease in colonoscopy (aPR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88) between 2018 and 2020.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this survey study, stool testing increased and counterbalanced a decrease in colonoscopy during 2020, and BC and CC screening modestly decreased. How these findings might be associated with outcomes is not yet known, but they will be important to monitor, especially in populations with lower socioeconomic status, who experienced greater screening decreases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Barriers Associated with Inadequate Follow-up of Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Results in a Safety-Net System: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

•

Less than 50% of patients with an abnormal FIT result had a documented reason.

•

Patient-level (e.g., declined colonoscopy) reasons were most frequently documented.

•

Interviews revealed discordance in documented and patient-reported reasons.

•

Mixed-methods analyses are needed to improve colonoscopy after abnormal FIT results.

In safety-net healthcare systems, colonoscopy completion within 1-year of an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result rarely exceeds 50%. Understanding how electronic health records (EHR) documented reasons for missed colonoscopy match or differ from patient-reported reasons, is critical to optimize effective interventions to address this challenge. We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study which included a retrospective analysis of EHR data and semi-structured interviews of adults 50–75 years old, with abnormal FIT results between 2014 and 2020 in a large safety-net healthcare system. Of the 299 patients identified, 59.2% (n = 177) did not complete a colonoscopy within one year of their abnormal result. EHR abstraction revealed a documented reason for lack of follow-up colonoscopy in 49.2% (n = 87/177); patient-level (e.g., declined colonoscopy; 51.5%) and multi-factorial reasons (e.g., lost to follow-up; 37.9%) were most common. In 18 patient interviews, patient (e.g., fear of colonoscopy), provider (e.g., lack of result awareness), and system-level reasons (e.g., scheduling challenges) were most common. Only three reasons for lack of colonoscopy overlapped between EHR data and patient interviews (competing health issues, lack of transportation, and abnormal FIT result attributed to another cause). In a cohort of safety-net patients with abnormal FIT results, the most common reasons for lack of follow-up were patient-related. Our analysis revealed a discordance between EHR documented and patient-reported reasons for lack of colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result. Mixed-methods analyses, as in the present study, may give us the greatest insight into modifiable determinants to develop effective interventions beyond quantitative and qualitative data analysis alone.

Mailed fecal testing and patient navigation versus usual care to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up colonoscopy in rural Medicaid enrollees: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background

Screening reduces incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC), yet US screening rates are low, particularly among Medicaid enrollees in rural communities. We describe a two-phase project, SMARTER CRC, designed to achieve the National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot^SM objectives by reducing the burden of CRC on the US population. Specifically, SMARTER CRC aims to test the implementation, effectiveness, and maintenance of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program to improve rates of CRC screening, follow-up colonoscopy, and referral to care in clinics serving rural Medicaid enrollees.

Methods

Phase I activities in SMARTER CRC include a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program involving three Medicaid health plans and 30 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho; the implementation of the program is supported by training and practice facilitation. Participating clinic units were randomized 1:1 into the intervention or usual care. The intervention combines (1) mailed fecal testing outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and (2) patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal fecal test result. We will evaluate the effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance of the intervention and track adaptations to the intervention and to implementation strategies, using quantitative and qualitative methods. Our primary effectiveness outcome is receipt of any CRC screening within 6 months of enrollee identification. Our primary implementation outcome is health plan- and clinic-level rates of program delivery, by component (mailed FIT and patient navigation). Trial results will inform phase II activities to scale up the program through partnerships with health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations that serve rural primary care clinics; scale-up will include webinars, train-the-trainer workshops, and collaborative learning activities.

Discussion

This study will test the implementation, effectiveness, and scale-up of a multi-component mailed fecal testing and patient navigation program to improve CRC screening rates in rural Medicaid enrollees. Our findings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings.

Trial registration

Registered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI’s Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP #: NCI-2021-01032) on May 11, 2021.

Non-compliance with colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test doubles the risk of dying from colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) among subjects with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) who do not undergo a colonoscopy is unknown. We estimated whether non-compliance with colonoscopy after a positive FIT is associated with increased CRC incidence and mortality.

METHODS

The FIT-based CRC screening programme in the Veneto region (Italy) invited persons aged 50 to 69 years with a positive FIT (>20 µg Hb/g faeces) for diagnostic colonoscopy at an endoscopic referral centre. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the 10-year cumulative CRC incidence and mortality among FIT positives who completed a diagnostic colonoscopy within the programme (compliers) and those who did not (non-compliers), using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox-Aalen models.

RESULTS

Some 88 013 patients who were FIT positive complied with colonoscopy (males: 56.1%; aged 50-59 years: 49.1%) while 23 410 did not (males: 54.6%; aged 50-59 years: 44.9%).The 10-year cumulative incidence of CRC was 44.7 per 1000 (95% CI, 43.1 to 46.3) among colonoscopy compliers and 54.3 per 1000 (95% CI, 49.9 to 58.7) in non-compliers, while the cumulative mortality for CRC was 6.8 per 1000 (95% CI, 5.9 to 7.6) and 16.0 per 1000 (95% CI, 13.1 to 18.9), respectively. The risk of dying of CRC among non-compliers was 103% higher than among compliers (adjusted HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.68 to 2.44).

CONCLUSION

The excess risk of CRC death among those not completing colonoscopy after a positive faecal occult blood test should prompt screening programmes to adopt effective interventions to increase compliance in this high-risk population.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

Chinese consensus on prevention of colorectal neoplasia (2021, Shanghai)

Most patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were diagnosed in advanced stage and the prognosis is poor. Therefore, early detection and prevention of CRC are very important. As with other cancers, there is also the tertiary prevention for CRC. The primary prevention is etiological prevention, which is mainly the treatment of adenoma or inflammation for preventing the development into cancer. The secondary prevention is the early diagnosis and early treatment for avoiding progressing to advanced cancer. The tertiary prevention belongs to the broad category of prevention, mainly for advanced CRC, through surgical treatment and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy for preventing tumor recurrence or metastasis. This consensus is based on the recent domestic and international consensus guidelines and the latest progress of international researches in the past five years. This consensus opinion seminar was hosted by the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology and Cancer Collaboration Group of Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, and was organized by the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology & Shanghai Institute of Digestive Disease, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The consensus opinion contains 60 statement clauses, the standard and basis of the evidence-based medicine grade and voting grade of the statement strictly complied with the relevant international regulations and practice.

Colonoscopy Following an Abnormal Fecal Test Result from an Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in a Federally Qualified Health Center

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result have an elevated risk of colorectal cancer, and the risk increases if the follow-up colonoscopy is delayed. Of note, rates of follow-up colonoscopy are alarmingly low in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), US health care settings that serve a majority racial and ethnic minority patient population. We assessed factors associated with colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result and used chart-abstracted data to assess reasons (including process measures) for lack of follow-up as part of an annual, mailed-FIT outreach program within a large, Latino-serving FQHC.

METHODS

As part of the National Institutes of Health-funded PROMPT study, we identified patients with an abnormal FIT result and used logistic regression to assess associations between patient demographics and receipt of follow-up colonoscopy, controlling for patients' preferred language. We report on time (days) to referral and time to colonoscopy. For charts with an abnormal FIT result but no evidence of colonoscopy, we performed a manual abstraction and obtained the reason for the absence of colonoscopy. When there was no evidence of colonoscopy in a patient's electronic health record (EHR), we performed an automated query of the administrative claims database to identify colonoscopy outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 324 patients with abnormal FIT results from July to October 2018. These patients were mostly publicly insured (Medicaid 53.1%, Medicare 14.5%), 81.8% were aged 50 to 64 years, 55.3% were female, 80.3% were Hispanic/Latino, and 67.3% preferred to speak Spanish. We found that 108/324 (33.3%) patients completed colonoscopy within 12 months, and the median time to colonoscopy was 94 days (IQR: 68-176). Common barriers to colonoscopy completion, obtained from chart-abstracted data, were: no documentation following referral to gastrointestinal (GI) specialist or GI consultation (41.6%), no referral to GI specialist following abnormal fecal test (34.2%), and absence of a valid insurance authorization (6.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-level strategies are needed to provide optimal care across the cancer continuum for FQHC patients. In order to reduce the risk of CRC and realize the return on fecal testing investment, concerted system-level efforts are urgently needed to improve rates of follow-up colonoscopy among FQHC patients and redress racial and ethnic disparities in CRC screening outcomes.

Colorectal Cancer Screening and Yield in a Mailed Outreach Program in a Safety-Net Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Screening with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) reduces colorectal cancer mortality; however, screening remains low in underserved populations. Mailed outreach, including an invitation letter, FIT, and test instructions, is an evidence-based strategy to improve screening.

AIMS

To examine screening completion and yield in a mailed outreach program in a safety-net healthcare system.

METHODS

We identified and mailed outreach invitations to patients due for screening in a large safety-net system between September 1, 2018, and August 31, 2019. We examined: (1) screening completion, the proportion of patients completing FIT or screening colonoscopy within 6 months of the mailed invitation; and (2) timely diagnostic colonoscopy, the proportion of patients completing colonoscopy within 6 months of positive FIT.

RESULTS

We mailed 14,879 invitations to 13,190 patients. Nearly half (n = 6098, 46.2%) of patients completed screening: 4,896 (80.3%) completed FIT through mailed outreach; 1,114 (18.3%) FIT through usual care; and 88 (1.4%) screening colonoscopy through usual care. Of patients with a positive FIT (n = 289), 50.5% completed diagnostic colonoscopy within 6 months, 10.7% within 6-12 months, and 4.8% after 12 months. A total of 8 cancers and 83 advanced adenomas were detected in the 191 patients completing diagnostic colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

After implementing and scaling up mailed outreach in a safety-net system, about half of patients completed screening, and the majority did so through mailed outreach. However, many patients failed to complete diagnostic colonoscopy after positive FIT. Results highlight the importance of adapting mailed outreach programs to local contexts and constraints of healthcare systems, in order to support efforts to improve CRC screening in underserved populations.

A Root Cause Analysis of Barriers to Timely Colonoscopy in California Safety-Net Health Systems

OBJECTIVES

Safety-net health care systems, serving vulnerable populations, see longer delays to timely colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT), which may contribute to existing disparities. We sought to identify root causes of colonoscopy delay after positive FOBT result in the primary care safety net.

METHODS

We conducted a multisite root cause analysis of cases of delayed colonoscopy, identifying cases where there was a delay of greater than 6 months in completing or scheduling a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive FOBT. We identified cases across 5 California health systems serving low-income, vulnerable populations. We developed a semistructured interview guide based on precedent work. We conducted telephone individual interviews with primary care providers (PCPs) and patients. We then performed qualitative content analysis of the interviews, using an integrated inductive-deductive analytic approach, to identify themes related to recurrent root causes of colonoscopy delay.

RESULTS

We identified 12 unique cases, comprising 5 patient and 11 PCP interviews. Eight patients completed colonoscopy; median time to colonoscopy was 11.0 months (interquartile range, 6.3 months). Three patients had advanced adenomatous findings. Primary care providers highlighted system-level root causes, including inability to track referrals between primary care and gastroenterology, lack of protocols to follow up with patients, lack of electronic medical record interoperability, and lack of time or staffing resources, compelling tremendous additional effort by staff. In contrast, patients' highlighted individual-level root causes included comorbidities, social needs, and misunderstanding the importance of the FOBT. There was a little overlap between PCP and patient-elicited root causes.

CONCLUSIONS

Current protocols do not accommodate communication between primary care and gastroenterology. Interventions to address specific barriers identified include improved interoperability between PCP and gastroenterology scheduling systems, protocols to follow-up on incomplete colonoscopies, accommodation for support and transport needs, and patient-friendly education. Interviewing both patients and PCPs leads to richer analysis of the root causes leading to delayed diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

Precision Patient Navigation to Improve Rates of Follow-up Colonoscopy, An Individual Randomized Effectiveness Trial

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening by annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) with follow-up on abnormal results is a cost-effective strategy to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Unfortunately, many patients with abnormal results do not complete a follow-up colonoscopy. We tested whether navigation targeted to patients who are unlikely to complete the procedure may improve adherence and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Study participants were patients at a large, integrated health system (Kaiser Permanente Northwest) who were ages 50 to 75 and were due for a follow-up colonoscopy after a recent abnormal FIT result. Probability of adherence to follow-up was estimated at baseline using a predictive risk model. Patients whose probability was 70% or lower were randomized to receive patient navigation or usual care, with randomization stratified by probability category (<50%, 50% < 60%, 60% < 65%, 65% ≤ 70%). We compared colonoscopy completion within 6 months between the navigation and usual care groups using Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 415; 200 assigned to patient navigation, 215 to usual care) had a mean age of 62 years, 54% were female, and 87% were non-Hispanic white. By 6 months, 76% of the patient navigation group had completed a colonoscopy, compared with 65% of the usual care group (HR = 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.72; log-rank P value = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized trial, patient navigation led to improvements in follow-up colonoscopy adherence.

IMPACT

More research is needed to assess the value of precision-directed navigation programs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

IMPORTANCE

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

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

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

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

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System

AIMS

Although colorectal cancer screening (CRC) using stool-based test is well-studied, evidence on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) patterns in a safety-net healthcare system utilizing opportunistic screening is limited. We studied the FIT completion rates and adenoma detection rate (ADR) of positive FIT-colonoscopy (FIT-C) in an urban safety-net system.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional chart review on individuals ≥ 50 years who underwent CRC screening using FIT or screening colonoscopy, 09/01/2017-08/30/2018. Demographic differences in FIT completion were studied; ADR of FIT-C was compared to that of screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Among 13,427 individuals with FIT ordered, 7248 (54%) completed the stool test and 230 (48%) followed up a positive FIT with colonoscopy. Increasing age (OR 1.01, CI 1.01-1.02), non-Hispanic Blacks (OR 0.87, CI 0.80-0.95, p = 0.002), current smokers (OR 0.84, CI 0.77-0.92, p < 0.0001), those with Medicaid (OR 0.86, CI 0.77-0.96, p = 0.006), commercial insurance (OR 0.85, CI 0.78-0.94, p = 0.002), CCI score ≥ 3 (OR 0.82, CI 0.74-0.91, p < 0.0001), orders by family medicine providers (OR 0.87, CI 0.81-0.94, p < 0.0001) were associated with lower completion of stool test. Individuals from low median household income cities had lower follow-up of positive FIT, OR 0.43, CI 0.21-0.86, p = 0.017. ADR of FIT-C was higher than that of screening colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to CRC screening is low in safety-net systems employing opportunistic screening. Understanding demographic differences may allow providers to formulate targeted strategies in high-risk vulnerable groups.

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.

A delay in colonoscopy after positive fecal tests leads to higher incidence of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A delay in performing colonoscopies after positive fecal tests in a screening program may risk neoplastic progression. Our objective is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of timing of a colonoscopy after a positive fecal test on the detection of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Cochrane guidelines and PRISMA statement were followed for this review. Digital dissertation databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2020, and all studies reporting the detection rates of colorectal cancer on the basis of different time intervals between a positive fecal test and the post-test colonoscopy were included. We compared the detection rates of colorectal cancer (overall and advanced-stage) and advanced adenoma based on different time intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 361 637 patients from six observational studies were included for the analysis. The odds of detecting any colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-2.03, P < 0.001), advanced-stage colorectal cancer (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.47-3.16, P < 0.001), or advanced adenomas (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.28, P = 0.001) are significantly higher if the colonoscopies are performed after 6 months from a positive fecal test, compared with within 6 months. There was no significant difference in the detection rates based on a 1-month, a 2-month, or a 3-month cut-off.

CONCLUSIONS

A delay of colonoscopies beyond 6 months after positive fecal tests is associated with a higher odds of detecting colorectal cancer. A timely follow up of patients with positive fecal tests is warranted.

Early colorectal cancer detection-Current and evolving challenges in evidence, guidelines, policy, and practices

The understanding at the beginning of the last century that colorectal cancer began as a localized disease that progressed and became systemic, and that most colorectal cancer arose from adenomatous polyps gave rise to aggressive attempts at curative treatment and eventually attempts to detect advanced lesions before they progressed to invasive disease. In the last four decades, steadily greater uptake of screening has led to reductions in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, the fullest potential of screening is not being met due to the lack of organized screening, where a systems approach could lead to higher rates of screening of average and high risk groups, higher quality screening, and prompt followup of adults with positive screening tests. ABSTRACT: Since the beginning of the 20th century, there has been a general understanding that colorectal cancer is a clonal disease that progresses from a localized stage with a favorable prognosis through progressively more advanced stages which have progressively worse prognosis. That understanding led first to determined efforts to detect and treat early stage symptomatic disease, and then to detect pre-symptomatic colorectal cancer and precursor lesions, where there was hope that the natural history of the disease could be arrested and the incidence and premature mortality of colorectal cancer averted. Toward the end of the last century, guidelines for colorectal cancer screening, growth in the number of technical options for screening, and a steady increase in the proportion of the adult population who attended screening contributed to the beginning of a significant decline in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Despite this progress, colorectal cancer remains the third leading cause of death among men and women in the United States. Screening for early detection of precursor lesions and localized cancer offers the single most productive opportunity to further reduce the burden of disease, and yet nearly four in five deaths from colorectal cancer are associated with having never been screened, not recently screened, or not followed up for an abnormal screening test. This simple observation is a call to action in all communities to apply existing knowledge to fulfill the potential to prevent avertable incidence and mortality.

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.

A qualitative study of patient preferences for prompts and reminders for a direct-mail fecal testing program

Programs that directly mail fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) to patients can increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, especially in low-income and Latino populations. Few studies have explored patient reactions to prompts or reminders that accompany such programs. As part of the Participatory Research to Advance Colon Cancer Prevention pilot study, which tested prompts and reminders to a direct-mail FIT program in a large, urban health center, we conducted telephone interviews among English- and Spanish-speaking participants who were assigned to receive a series of text message prompts, automated phone call reminders, and/or live phone call reminders. We analyzed interviews using a qualitative content analysis approach. We interviewed 41 participants, including 25 responders (61%) and 16 nonresponders (39%) to the direct-mail program. Participants appreciated program ease and convenience. Few participants recalled receiving prompts or automated/live reminders; nevertheless, the vast majority (95%, n = 39) thought reminders were acceptable and helpful and suggested that 2-3 reminders delivered starting 1 week after the mailed FIT would optimally encourage completion. Prompts and reminders used with mailed-FIT programs are accepted by patients, and my help boost response rates.

Interventions to ensure follow-up of positive fecal immunochemical tests: An international survey of screening programs

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer screening programs frequently report problems ensuring adequate follow-up of positive fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). We investigated strategies implemented by ongoing screening programs to improve follow-up for FIT-positive participants, and explored associations between interventions and reported rates of follow-up.

METHODS

We submitted an electronic survey to 58 colorectal cancer screening programs or affiliated researchers. Primary outcomes were the proportion of program participants with a positive FIT completing diagnostic colonoscopy, and patient, provider, and system-level interventions used to improve follow-up. We compare mean colonoscopy completion at six months in programs with and without interventions.

RESULTS

Thirty-five programs completed the survey (60% response). The mean proportion of participants with a positive FIT who completed colonoscopy was 79% (standard deviation 16%). Programs used a mean of five interventions to improve follow-up. Programs using patient navigators had an 11% higher rate of colonoscopy completion at six months (p = 0.05). Programs sending reminders to primary care providers when no colonoscopy has been completed had a 12% higher rate of colonoscopy completion (p = 0.03). Other interventions were not associated with significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost all programs employ multiple interventions to ensure timely follow-up of positive FIT. The use of patient navigators and provider reminders is associated with higher rates of colonoscopy completion.

Barriers to completing colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test

Background

Colorectal cancer leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Early detection and treatment are essential. Screening using fecal occult blood tests has increased significantly, but adherence to colonoscopy follow-up is suboptimal, increasing CRC mortality risk.

The aim of this study was to identify barriers to colonoscopy following a positive FOBT at the level of the patient, physician, organization and policymakers.

Methods

This mixed methods study was conducted at two health care organizations in Israel. The study included retrospective analyses of 45,281 50–74 year-old members with positive fecal immunochemical tests from 2010 to 2014, and a survey of 772 patients with a positive test during 2015, with and without follow-up. The qualitative part of the study included focus groups with primary physicians and gastroenterologists and in-depth interviews with opinion leaders in healthcare.

Results

Patient lack of comprehension regarding the test was the strongest predictor of non-adherence to follow-up. Older age, Arab ethnicity, and lower socio economic status significantly reduced adherence. We found no correlation with gender, marital status, patient activation, waiting time for appointments or distance from gastroenterology clinics. Primary care physicians underestimate non-adherence rates. They feel responsible for patient follow-up, but express lack of time and skills that will allow them to ensure adherence among their patients. Gastroenterologists do not consider fecal occult blood an effective tool for CRC detection, and believe that all patients should undergo colonoscopy. Opinion leaders in the healthcare field do not prioritize the issue of follow-up after a positive screening test for colorectal cancer, although they understand the importance.

Conclusions

We identified important barriers that need to be addressed to improve the effectiveness of the screening program. Targeted interventions for populations at risk for non-adherence, specifically for those with low literacy levels, and better explanation of the need for follow-up as a routine need to be set in place. Lack of agreement between screening recommendations and gastroenterologist opinion, and lack of awareness among healthcare authority figures negatively impact the screening program need to be addressed at the organizational and national level.

Trial registration

This study was approved by the IRB in both participating organizations (Meuhedet Health Care Institutional Review Board #02–2–5-15, Maccabi Healthcare Institutional Review Board BBI-0025-16). Participant consent was waived by both IRB’s.

Systems-based Strategies Improve Positive Screening Fecal Immunochemical Testing Follow-up and Reduce Time to Diagnostic Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is the most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool worldwide and accounts for 10% of all CRC screening in the United States. Potential vulnerabilities for patients enrolled to facilities within the military health system have recently come to light requiring reassessment of best practices. We studied the impact of a process improvement initiative designed to improve the safety and quality of care for patients after a positive screening FIT given previously published reports of poor organization performance.

METHODS

During a time of increased utilization of nonendoscopic means of screening, we assessed rates of colonoscopy completion and time to colonoscopy after positive FIT after a multi-faceted process improvement initiative was implemented, compared against an institutional control period. The interventions included mandatory indication labeling at the time of order entry, as well as utilization of subspecialty nurse navigators to facilitate rapid follow-up even the absence of a referral from primary care.

RESULTS

Preintervention, 34.8% of patients did not have appropriate follow-up of a positive FIT. Those that did had a variable and prolonged wait time of 140.1 ± 115.9 days. Postintervention, a standardized order mandating test indication labeling allowed for proactive gastroenterology involvement. Colonoscopy follow-up rate increased to 91.9% with an average interval of 21.9 ± 12.3 days.

CONCLUSION

The addition of indication labels and patient navigation after positive screening FIT was associated with 57.1% absolute increase in timely diagnostic colonoscopy. Similar highly reliable systems-based solutions should be adopted for CRC screening, and further implementation for other preventative screening interventions should be pursued.

[PAPPS Cancer Expert Group. Cancer Prevention Recommendations. 2020 PAPPS update]

El cáncer es una de las principales causas de morbilidad y mortalidad. El consumo de tabaco, la dieta poco saludable, la inactividad física son algunos de los factores de riesgo que forman parte del estilo de vida y que han provocado un aumento del cáncer. En este artículo se actualizan las evidencias y recomendaciones de las estrategias de prevención para cada uno de los cánceres con mayor incidencia, con base en la disminución de los factores de riesgo (prevención primaria) y en el diagnóstico precoz del cáncer, a través del cribado y la detección temprana de los signos y síntomas, en población de riesgo medio y de riesgo elevado.

The effect of a simple phone call intervention on FIT-positive individuals: an exploratory study

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to improve patient outcomes. A widely utilised preliminary screening tool is the faecal immunochemical test (FIT). However, follow-up rates after a positive FIT result remain suboptimal.

METHODS

In order to improve FIT-positive individuals' compliance to follow-up consultation and to elucidate barriers to action, a simple 5- to 10-min telephone intervention with a structured script based on the protection motivation theory (PMT) was conducted.

RESULTS

Ninety-two FIT-positive individuals who had previously rejected follow-up consultation in the National University Hospital, Singapore, were interviewed by the study team. Individuals reported barriers to action such as the denial of a positive FIT result (41.8%) and a lack of knowledge (34.5%). More than 20% of the participants who had yet to schedule follow-up consultation changed their minds after the intervention.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a simple, structured telephone call can potentially encourage more FIT-positive individuals to pursue follow-up investigation.

Dental practitioners' use of health risk assessments for a variety of health conditions: Results from the South Atlantic region of The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

BACKGROUND

An important step in integrating dental and medical care is improving understanding of the frequency and characteristics of dental practitioners who conduct health risk assessments (HRAs).

METHODS

From September 2017 through July 2018, active dentist and hygienist members of the South Atlantic region of The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (N = 870) were invited to participate in a survey evaluating their HRA practices (screening, measuring, discussing, referring patients) for 6 health conditions (obesity, hypertension, sexual activities, diabetes, alcohol use, tobacco use). For each health condition, the authors used ordinal logistic regression to measure the associations among the practitioner's HRA practices and the practitioner's characteristics, barriers, and practice characteristics.

RESULTS

Most of the 475 responding practitioners (≥ 72%) reported they at least occasionally complete 1 or more HRA steps for the health conditions except sexual activities. Most practitioners screened (that is, asked about) and gave referral information to affected patients for diabetes (56%) and hypertension (63%). Factors associated with each increased HRA practice for 2 or more outcomes were non-Hispanic white compared with Hispanic practitioner (cumulative odds ratio [COR] obesity, 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2 to 0.8; and COR diabetes, 0.3; 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8), male compared with female practitioner (COR tobacco, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.7; and COR hypertension, 0.4; 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8), and practitioner discomfort (COR, obesity and alcohol use, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9; and COR, sexual activities 0.6; 95% CI 0.5 to 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Dental practitioners are conducting HRA practices for multiple conditions. Interventions should focus on reducing practitioner discomfort and target non-Hispanic white, male practitioners.

Framework and Strategies to Eliminate Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes

Preventable differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality across racial/ethnic, economic, geographic, and other groups can be eliminated by assuring equitable access and quality across the care continuum, but few interventions have been demonstrated to do so. Multicomponent strategies designed with a health equity framework may be effective. A health equity framework takes into account social determinants of health, multilevel influences (policy, community, delivery, and individual levels), screening processes, and community engagement. Effective strategies for increasing screening uptake include patient navigation and other interventions for structural barriers, reminders and clinical decision support, and data to continuously track metrics and guide targets for improvement. Community resource gaps should be addressed to assure high-quality services irrespective of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status. One model combinespopulation-based proactive outreach screening with screening delivery at in-person or virtual points of contact, as well as community engagement. Patient- and provider-based behavioral interventions may be considered for increasing screening demand and delivery. Providing a choice of screening tests is recommended for CRC screening, and access to colonoscopy is required for completion of the CRC screening process.