Root-cause analyses of missed opportunities for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background: Colonoscopic surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) leads to earlier detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and reduces CRC-associated mortality. However, it is limited by poor adherence in practice. Aim: To identify missed opportunities to detect IBD-associated CRC at our hospital METHODS: We undertook root-cause analyses to identify patients with missed opportunities to diagnose IBD-associated CRC. We matched patients with IBD-associated CRC to patients with CRC in the general population to identify differences in staging at diagnosis and clinical outcomes. Results: Compared with the general population, patients with IBD were at increased risk of developing CRC (odds ratio 2.7 [95% CI 1.6-3.9], P < 0.001). The mean incidence of IBD-associated CRC between 1998 and 2019 was 165.4 (IQR 130.4-199.4) per 100 000 patients and has not changed over the last 20 years. Seventy-eight patients had IBD-associated CRC. Forty-two (54%) patients were eligible for CRC surveillance: 12% (5/42) and 10% (4/42) patients were diagnosed with CRC at an appropriately timed or overdue surveillance colonoscopy, respectively. Interval cancers occurred in 14% (6/42) of patients; 64% (27/42) of patients had a missed opportunity for colonoscopic surveillance where root-cause analyses demonstrated that 10/27 (37%) patients known to secondary care had not been offered surveillance. Four (15%) patients had a delayed diagnosis of CRC due to failure to account for previous colonoscopic findings. Seventeen (63%) patients were managed by primary care including seven patients discharged from secondary care without a surveillance plan. Matched case-control analysis did not show significant differences in cancer staging or 10-year survival outcomes. Conclusion: The incidence of IBD-associated CRC has remained static. Two-thirds of patients eligible for colonoscopic surveillance had missed opportunities to diagnose CRC. Surveillance programmes without comprehensive and fully integrated recall systems across primary and secondary care are set to fail.published version, accepted version (12 month embargo), submitted versionThis article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the Publisher URL to access it via the publisher's site

Root-cause analyses of missed opportunities for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background: Colonoscopic surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) leads to earlier detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and reduces CRC-associated mortality. However, it is limited by poor adherence in practice. Aim: To identify missed opportunities to detect IBD-associated CRC at our hospital METHODS: We undertook root-cause analyses to identify patients with missed opportunities to diagnose IBD-associated CRC. We matched patients with IBD-associated CRC to patients with CRC in the general population to identify differences in staging at diagnosis and clinical outcomes. Results: Compared with the general population, patients with IBD were at increased risk of developing CRC (odds ratio 2.7 [95% CI 1.6-3.9], P < 0.001). The mean incidence of IBD-associated CRC between 1998 and 2019 was 165.4 (IQR 130.4-199.4) per 100 000 patients and has not changed over the last 20 years. Seventy-eight patients had IBD-associated CRC. Forty-two (54%) patients were eligible for CRC surveillance: 12% (5/42) and 10% (4/42) patients were diagnosed with CRC at an appropriately timed or overdue surveillance colonoscopy, respectively. Interval cancers occurred in 14% (6/42) of patients; 64% (27/42) of patients had a missed opportunity for colonoscopic surveillance where root-cause analyses demonstrated that 10/27 (37%) patients known to secondary care had not been offered surveillance. Four (15%) patients had a delayed diagnosis of CRC due to failure to account for previous colonoscopic findings. Seventeen (63%) patients were managed by primary care including seven patients discharged from secondary care without a surveillance plan. Matched case-control analysis did not show significant differences in cancer staging or 10-year survival outcomes. Conclusion: The incidence of IBD-associated CRC has remained static. Two-thirds of patients eligible for colonoscopic surveillance had missed opportunities to diagnose CRC. Surveillance programmes without comprehensive and fully integrated recall systems across primary and secondary care are set to fail.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the Publisher URL to access it via the publisher's site.published version, accepted version (12 month embargo), submitted versio

O11 Outcomes of GP outreach programme offering colonoscopic surveillance for IBD patients managed in primary care

Introduction Colonoscopic surveillance in IBD patients can reduce the development of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the rate of CRC-associated death. We recently reported that 27% of IBD patients living in East Devon are managed exclusively in primary care of whom about 23% maybe eligible for colonoscopic surveillance. We devised an outreach programme, whereby we invited primary care physicians to enrol these patients in a colonoscopic surveillance programme.Methods In December 2017 we contacted 37 general practices, where 161 patients with UC who were eligible for surveillance had been identified. Each practice was sent a letter explaining the goals of the project, a link to the National Institute for Healthcare and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance for CRC surveillance in IBD patients and patient information booklets. We informed the practices of their eligible patients and asked them to refer patients for secondary care IBD consults if appropriate. We included an outcome form that captured whether the patient was referred, was deemed inappropriate for surveillance, had surveillance elsewhere, had declined surveillance, or was no longer registered at the practice.Results Sixty-five percent of practices (24/37) responded and we received responses for 57 of 161 (35%) potentially eligible patients. Thirty-five (61%) patients were referred to our IBD service; 7 (12%) patients declined surveillance; 7 (12%) patients were deemed by their GP to be unfit for surveillance and 5 (10%) were no longer registered at the identified GP practice; 2 (4%) had surveillance arranged elsewhere and 1 (2%) patient had died. Amongst the 35 patients referred to secondary care; 22 (63%) underwent surveillance colonoscopy, 12 (34%) declined surveillance after discussion or did not attend their booked appointments and one is awaiting colonoscopy. Half of patients who had a colonoscopy had active inflammation. We diagnosed one CRC He was an elderly man with a locally invasive signet ring caecal tumour, without distant metastases, who went onto to have a curative right hemicolectomy without complication.Conclusions Patients with longstanding IBD are frequently managed exclusively in primary care and maybe overlooked for colonoscopic CRC surveillance. There is a need to implement processes to facilitate identification and recall of patients eligible for surveillance across primary and secondary care.The article is available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text.Published version, accepted version, submitted versio