100 research outputs found

    Persistent demographic differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization despite Medicare reimbursement

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening is widely recommended, but often under-utilized. In addition, significant demographic differences in screening utilization exist. Insurance coverage may be one factor influencing utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of claims for outpatient services for Washington state Medicare beneficiaries in calendar year 2000. We determined the proportion of beneficiaries utilizing screening fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or double contrast barium enema in the overall population and various demographic subgroups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the relative odds of screening in different demographic groups. RESULTS: Approximately 9.2% of beneficiaries had fecal occult blood tests, 7.2% had any colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or barium enema (invasive) colon tests, and 3.5% had invasive tests for screening indications. Colonoscopy accounted for 41% of all invasive tests for screening indications. Women were more likely to receive fecal occult blood test screening (OR 1.18; 95%CI 1.15, 1.21) and less likely to receive invasive tests for screening indications than men (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.77, 0.83). Whites were more likely than other racial groups to receive any type of screening. Rural residents were more likely than urban residents to have fecal occult blood tests (OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.17, 1.23) but less likely to receive invasive tests for screening indications (OR 0.89; 95%CI 0.85, 0.93). CONCLUSION: Reported use of fecal occult blood testing remains modest. Overall use of the more invasive tests for screening indications remains essentially unchanged, but there has been a shift toward increased use of screening colonoscopy. Significant demographic differences in screening utilization persist despite consistent insurance coverage

    Get screened: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to increase mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a large, safety net practice

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Most randomized controlled trials of interventions designed to promote cancer screening, particularly those targeting poor and minority patients, enroll selected patients. Relatively little is known about the benefits of these interventions among unselected patients. Methods/Design "Get Screened" is an American Cancer Society-sponsored randomized controlled trial designed to promote mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a primary care practice serving low-income patients. Eligible patients who are past due for mammography or colorectal cancer screening are entered into a tracking registry and randomly assigned to early or delayed intervention. This 6-month intervention is multimodal, involving patient prompts, clinician prompts, and outreach. At the time of the patient visit, eligible patients receive a low-literacy patient education tool. At the same time, clinicians receive a prompt to remind them to order the test and, when appropriate, a tool designed to simplify colorectal cancer screening decision-making. Patient outreach consists of personalized letters, automated telephone reminders, assistance with scheduling, and linkage of uninsured patients to the local National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection program. Interventions are repeated for patients who fail to respond to early interventions. We will compare rates of screening between randomized groups, as well as planned secondary analyses of minority patients and uninsured patients. Data from the pilot phase show that this multimodal intervention triples rates of cancer screening (adjusted odds ratio 3.63; 95% CI 2.35 - 5.61). Discussion This study protocol is designed to assess a multimodal approach to promotion of breast and colorectal cancer screening among underserved patients. We hypothesize that a multimodal approach will significantly improve cancer screening rates. The trial was registered at Clinical Trials.gov NCT00818857http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78264/1/1472-6963-10-280.xmlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78264/2/1472-6963-10-280.pdfPeer Reviewe

    Development and initial testing of a computer-based patient decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening for primary care practice

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Although colorectal cancer screening is recommended by major policy-making organizations, rates of screening remain low. Our aim was to develop a patient-directed, computer-based decision aid about colorectal cancer screening and investigate whether it could increase patient interest in screening. METHODS: We used content from evidence-based literature reviews and our previous decision aid research to develop a prototype. We performed two rounds of usability testing with representative patients to revise the content and format. The final decision aid consisted of an introductory segment, four test-specific segments, and information to allow comparison of the tests across several key parameters. We then conducted a before-after uncontrolled trial of 80 patients 50–75 years old recruited from an academic internal medicine practice. RESULTS: Mean viewing time was 19 minutes. The decision aid improved patients' intent to ask providers for screening from a mean score of 2.8 (1 = not at all likely to ask, 4 = very likely to ask) before viewing the decision aid to 3.2 afterwards (difference, 0.4; p < 0.0001, paired t-test). Most found the aid useful and reported that it improved their knowledge about screening. Sixty percent said they were ready to be tested, 18% needed more information, and 22% were not ready to be screened. Within 6 months of viewing, 43% of patients had completed screening tests. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a computer-based decision aid can increase patient intent to be screened and increase interest in screening. Practice Implications: This decision aid can be viewed by patients prior to provider appointments to increase motivation to be screened and to help them decide about which modality to use for screening. Further work is required to integrate the decision aid with other practice change strategies to raise screening rates to target levels

    Risk perception among Brazilian individuals with high risk for colorectal cancer and colonoscopy

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Risk perception is considered a motivating factor for adopting preventive behaviors. This study aimed to verify the demographic characteristics and cancer family history that are predictors of risk perception and to verify if risk perception is a predictor of colonoscopy adherence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Individuals with a family colorectal cancer history as indicated by a proband with cancer were interviewed by telephone. They responded to a questionnaire covering demographic characteristics, colonoscopy history and four questions on risk perception. Tests of multiple linear regression and logistic regression were used to identify associations between dependent and independent variables.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The 117 participants belonged to 62 families and had a mean age of 45.2 years. The majority of these individuals were female (74.4%) and from families who met the Amsterdam Criteria (54.7%). The average risk perception was 47.6%, with a median of 50%. The average population perception of individual risk was 55.4%, with a median of 50%. Variables associated with a higher risk perception were age, gender, religion, school level, income, and death of a family member. The variable predicting colonoscopy was receiving medical information regarding risk (odds ratio OR 8.40).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We found that family cancer history characteristics (number of relatives with cancer, risk classification) are associated with adequate risk perception. Risk perception does not predict colonoscopy in this sample. The only variable that predicted colonoscopy was receiving medical information recommending screening.</p

    The value of age and medical history for predicting colorectal cancer and adenomas in people referred for colonoscopy

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colonoscopy is an invasive and costly procedure with a risk of serious complications. It would therefore be useful to prioritise colonoscopies by identifying people at higher risk of either cancer or premalignant adenomas. The aim of this study is to assess a model that identifies people with colorectal cancer, advanced, large and small adenomas.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients seen by gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons between April 2004 and December 2006 completed a validated, structured self-administered questionnaire prior to colonoscopy. Information was collected on symptoms, demographics and medical history. Multinomial logistic regression was used to simultaneously assess factors associated with findings on colonoscopy of cancer, advanced adenomas and adenomas sized 6 -9 mm, and ≤ 5 mm. The area under the curve of ROC curve was used to assess the incremental gain of adding demographic variables, medical history and symptoms (in that order) to a base model that included only age.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Sociodemographic variables, medical history and symptoms (from 8,204 patients) jointly provide good discrimination between colorectal cancer and no abnormality (AUC 0.83), but discriminate less well between adenomas and no abnormality (AUC advanced adenoma 0.70; other adenomas 0.67). Age is the dominant risk factor for cancer and adenomas of all sizes. Having a colonoscopy within the last 10 years confers protection for cancers and advanced adenomas.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our models provide guidance about which factors can assist in identifying people at higher risk of disease using easily elicited information. This would allow colonoscopy to be prioritised for those for whom it would be of most benefit.</p

    Increasing uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Korea: a population-based study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low in most Asian countries and remain largely unknown. This study examined trends in CRC screening rates after the introduction of the Korean National Cancer Screening Programme (NCSP) and determined the factors associated with uptake of CRC screening by test modality over time.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An annual population-based survey conducted through nationally representative random sampling from 2005-2008. In total, 3,699 participants from the 2005-2008 surveys were selected as study subjects. Face-to-face interviews were performed to assess the utilization rate of CRC screening by each screening modality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, CRC screening within the recommended time interval increased significantly from 22.9% in 2005 to 36.6% in 2008 (<it>p </it>< 0.001). The proportion of subjects receiving a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) test within the previous year increased significantly from 7.2% in 2005 to 21.3% in 2008 (<it>p </it>< 0.001). Increases in FOBT testing were highest among those who had a lower income status (relative difference = 511.9%) and women (relative difference = 266.1%). Endoscopy use also increased from 18.0% in 2005 to 20.5% in 2008, albeit not significant. Overall, those who were male, non-smokers, 60-69 years old, and had a higher income status were more likely to have undergone up-to-date endoscopy and CRC screening.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study revealed a substantial increase in up-to-date CRC screening in the general population from 2005 to 2008. However, more than half of adults in Korea are still not up-to-date with their CRC tests. It will be important to continue to investigate factors associated with up-to-date CRC screening by each modality.</p

    Adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines in Canada

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To identify correlates of adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines in average-risk Canadians.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>2003 Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2.1 respondents who were at least 50 years old, without past or present CRC and living in Ontario, Newfoundland, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia were included. Outcomes, defined according to current CRC screening guidelines, included adherence to: i) fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (in prior 2 years), ii) endoscopy (colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy) (prior 10 years), and iii) adherence to CRC screening guidelines, defined as either (i) or (ii). Generalized estimating equations regression was employed to identify correlates of the study outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 17,498 respondents, 70% were non-adherent CRC screening to guidelines. Specifically, 85% and 79% were non-adherent to FOBT and endoscopy, respectively. Correlates for all outcomes were: having a regular physician (OR = (i) 2.68; (ii) 1.91; (iii) 2.39), getting a flu shot (OR = (i) 1.59; (ii) 1.51; (iii) 1.55), and having a chronic condition (OR = (i) 1.32; (ii) 1.48; (iii) 1.43). Greater physical activity, higher consumption of fruits and vegetables and smoking cessation were each associated with at least 1 outcome. Self-perceived stress was modestly associated with increased odds of adherence to endoscopy and to CRC screening guidelines (OR = (ii) 1.07; (iii) 1.06, respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Healthy lifestyle behaviors and factors that motivate people to seek health care were associated with adherence, implying that invitations for CRC screening should come from sources that are independent of physicians, such as the government, in order to reduce disparities in CRC screening.</p

    Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072]

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The major limit to colorectal cancer screening effectiveness is often low compliance. We studied the reasons for non compliance and determinants of compliance to faecal occult blood tests in Lazio, Italy. METHODS: This is a case-control study nested within a trial that tested the effect of type of test and provider on colorectal cancer screening compliance. Non compliant trial subjects were classified as cases, and compliant subjects were classified as controls. We sampled 600 cases and 600 controls matched by their general practitioner, half were invited for screening at the hospital, and the other half directly at their general practitioner's office. Cases and controls answered questions on: distance from test provider, logistical problems, perception of colorectal cancer risk, confidence in screening efficacy, fear of results, presence of colorectal cancer in the family, and gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: About 31% of cases never received the letter offering free screening, and 17% of the sampled population had already been screened. The first reported reason for non-compliance was "lack of time" (30%); the major determinant of compliance was the distance from the test provider: odds ratio >30 minutes vs <15 minutes 0.3 (95%CI = 0.2–0.7). The odds ratio for lack of time was 0.16 (95% IC 0.1–0.26). The effect was stronger if the hospital (0.03 95%CI = 0.01–0.1) rather than the general practitioner (0.3 95%CI = 0.2–0.6) was the provider. Twenty-two percent of controls were accompanied by someone to the test. CONCLUSION: To increase compliance, screening programmes must involve test providers who are geographically close to the target population

    Incidence and Outcome of Acute Phosphate Nephropathy in Iceland

    Get PDF
    To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldBACKGROUND: Oral sodium phosphate solutions (OSPS) are widely used for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy and other procedures. Cases of renal failure due to acute phosphate nephropathy following OSPS ingestion have been documented in recent years, questioning the safety of OSPS. However, the magnitude of the problem remains unknown. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted a population based, retrospective analysis of medical records and biopsies of all cases of acute phosphate nephropathy that were diagnosed in our country in the period from January 2005 to October 2008. Utilizing the complete official sales figures of OSPS, we calculated the incidence of acute phosphate nephropathy in our country. Fifteen cases of acute phosphate nephropathy were diagnosed per 17,651 sold doses of OSPS (0.085%). Nine (60%) were women and mean age 69 years (range 56-75 years). Thirteen patients had a history of hypertension (87%) all of whom were treated with either ACE-I or ARB and/or diuretics. One patient had underlying DM type I and an active colitis and one patient had no risk factor for the development of acute phosphate nephropathy. Average baseline creatinine was 81.7 µmol/L and 180.1 at the discovery of acute renal failure, mean 4.2 months after OSPS ingestion. No patient had a full recovery of renal function, and at the end of follow-up, 26.6 months after the OSPS ingestion, the average creatinine was 184.2 µmol/L. The average eGFR declined from 73.5 ml/min/1.73 m(2) at baseline to 37.3 ml/min/1.73 m(2) at the end of follow-up. One patient reached end-stage renal disease and one patient died with progressive renal failure. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Acute phosphate nephropathy developed in almost one out of thousand sold doses of OSPS. The consequences for kidney function were detrimental. This information can be used in other populations to estimate the impact of OSPS. Our data suggest that acute phosphate nephropathy may be greatly underreported worldwide
    corecore