PURPOSE: As evidence mounts for effectiveness, an increasing proportion of the United States population undergoes colorectal cancer screening. However, relatively little is known about rates of follow-up after abnormal results from initial screening tests. This study examines patterns of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up within the nation's largest integrated health care system: the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: We obtained information about patients who received colorectal cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration from an existing quality improvement program and from the Veterans Health Administration's electronic medical record. Linking these data, we analyzed receipt of screening and follow-up testing after a positive fecal occult blood test. RESULTS: A total of 39,870 patients met criteria for colorectal cancer screening; of these 61 percent were screened. Screening was more likely in patients aged 70 to 80 years than in those younger or older. Female gender (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9-0.95), Black race (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.89-0.96), lower income, and infrequent primary care visits were associated with lower likelihood of screening. Of those patients with a positive fecal occult blood test (n = 313), 59 percent received a follow-up barium enema or colonoscopy. Patient-level factors did not predict receipt of a follow-up test. CONCLUSIONS: The Veterans Health Administration rates for colorectal cancer screening are significantly higher than the national average. However, 41 percent of patients with positive fecal occult blood tests failed to receive follow-up testing. Efforts to measure the quality of colorectal cancer screening programs should focus on the entire diagnostic process.
PURPOSE: As evidence mounts for effectiveness, an increasing proportion of the United States population undergoes colorectal cancer screening. However, relatively little is known about rates of follow-up after abnormal results from initial screening tests. This study examines patterns of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up within the nation's largest integrated health care system: the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: We obtained information about patients who received colorectal cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration from an existing quality improvement program and from the Veterans Health Administration's electronic medical record. Linking these data, we analyzed receipt of screening and follow-up testing after a positive fecal occult blood test. RESULTS: A total of 39,870 patients met criteria for colorectal cancer screening; of these 61 percent were screened. Screening was more likely in patients aged 70 to 80 years than in those younger or older. Female gender (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9-0.95), Black race (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.89-0.96), lower income, and infrequent primary care visits were associated with lower likelihood of screening. Of those patients with a positive fecal occult blood test (n = 313), 59 percent received a follow-up barium enema or colonoscopy. Patient-level factors did not predict receipt of a follow-up test. CONCLUSIONS: The Veterans Health Administration rates for colorectal cancer screening are significantly higher than the national average. However, 41 percent of patients with positive fecal occult blood tests failed to receive follow-up testing. Efforts to measure the quality of colorectal cancer screening programs should focus on the entire diagnostic process.
Authors: Lillian C Min; David B Reuben; Emmett Keeler; David A Ganz; Constance H Fung; Paul Shekelle; Carol P Roth; Neil S Wenger Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Chyke A Doubeni; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Angela C Young; Carrie N Klabunde; George Reed; Terry S Field; Robert H Fletcher Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Ann Oluloro; Amanda F Petrik; Ann Turner; Tanya Kapka; Jennifer Rivelli; Patricia A Carney; Somnath Saha; Gloria D Coronado Journal: J Community Health Date: 2016-08
Authors: Stephen H Taplin; Sallie Weaver; Veronica Chollette; Lawrence B Marks; Andrew Jacobs; Gordon Schiff; Carrie T Stricker; Suanna S Bruinooge; Eduardo Salas Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Anna N A Tosteson; Elisabeth F Beaber; Jasmin Tiro; Jane Kim; Anne Marie McCarthy; Virginia P Quinn; V Paul Doria-Rose; Cosette M Wheeler; William E Barlow; Mackenzie Bronson; Michael Garcia; Douglas A Corley; Jennifer S Haas; Ethan A Halm; Aruna Kamineni; Carolyn M Rutter; Tor D Tosteson; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Donald L Weaver Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Hardeep Singh; Lindsey Wilson; Laura A Petersen; Mona K Sawhney; Brian Reis; Donna Espadas; Dean F Sittig Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2009-12-09 Impact factor: 2.796