Literature DB >> 16775188

Barriers to full colon evaluation for a positive fecal occult blood test.

Deborah A Fisher1, Amy Jeffreys, Cynthia J Coffman, Kenneth Fasanella.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Failure to appropriately evaluate a positive cancer screening test may negate the value of doing that test. The primary aim of this study was to explore the factors associated with undergoing a full colon evaluation for a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in a single Veterans Affairs center.
METHODS: Medical records of consecutive patients ages > or = 50 years, who had a positive screening FOBT from March 2000 to February 2001, were abstracted. Patient demographics, dates of ordering and doing follow-up test(s), and adherence with scheduled procedures were collected. The primary outcome, full colon evaluation, was defined as having a colonoscopy or double-contrast barium enema plus flexible sigmoidoscopy completed within 12 months.
RESULTS: The sample (N = 538) was 98% men (58% Caucasian, 29% African-American, and 13% unknown race). Approximately 77% of the patients were referred to gastroenterology. Ultimately, only 44% underwent full colon evaluation within 12 months. Approximately 20% of the patients failed to attend a scheduled procedure. Referral to gastroenterology and adherence to follow-up appointments were associated with full colon evaluation. There was no association between African-American versus Caucasian race and full colon evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the patients with a positive FOBT had a full colon evaluation within 12 months. Multiple failures were identified, including lack of referral for further testing and patient nonadherence. Although the overall performance in evaluating a positive colorectal cancer screening test was poor, no racial disparity was observed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16775188     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0916

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  53 in total

1.  Reducing referral delays in colorectal cancer diagnosis: is it about how you ask?

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Laura A Petersen; Kuang Daci; Clyde Collins; Myrna Khan; Hashem B El-Serag
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2010-06-27

2.  Timeliness of Colonoscopy After Abnormal Fecal Test Results in a Safety Net Practice.

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

Review 3.  When even people at high risk do not take up colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  Attitude of the Italian general population towards prevention and screening of the most common tumors, with special emphasis on colorectal malignancies.

Authors:  Federica Domati; Estratios Travlos; Claudia Cirilli; Giuseppina Rossi; Piero Benatti; Massimiliano Marino; Giovanni Ponti; Maria Vandelli; Simone Valmori; Amal Oursana; Annalisa Pezzi; Maurizio Ponz de Leon
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 3.397

5.  Electronic medical records and improving the quality of the screening process.

Authors:  Deborah A Fisher
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Levels and variation in overuse of fecal occult blood testing in the Veterans Health Administration.

Authors:  Melissa R Partin; Adam A Powell; Ann Bangerter; Krysten Halek; James F Burgess; Deborah A Fisher; David B Nelson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  A vision for using online portals for surveillance of patient-centered communication in cancer care.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Neeraj K Arora; Kathleen M Mazor; Richard L Street
Journal:  Patient Exp J       Date:  2015 Fall-Winter

8.  Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Thomas D Sequist; Alan M Zaslavsky; Richard Marshall; Robert H Fletcher; John Z Ayanian
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-02-23

9.  Using a multifaceted approach to improve the follow-up of positive fecal occult blood test results.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Himabindu Kadiyala; Gayathri Bhagwath; Anila Shethia; Hashem El-Serag; Annette Walder; Maria E Velez; Laura A Petersen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 10.864

10.  Improving follow-up of abnormal cancer screens using electronic health records: trust but verify test result communication.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.