Literature DB >> 17932360

Data sources for measuring colorectal endoscopy use among Medicare enrollees.

Anna P Schenck1, Carrie N Klabunde, Joan L Warren, Sharon Peacock, William W Davis, Sarah T Hawley, Michael Pignone, David F Ransohoff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Estimates of colorectal cancer test use vary widely by data source. Medicare claims offer one source for monitoring test use, but their utility has not been validated. We compared ascertainment of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy between three data sources: self reports, Medicare claims, and medical records.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population included Medicare enrollees residing in North Carolina (n = 561) who had participated in a telephone survey on colorectal cancer tests. Medicare claims were obtained for the 5 years preceding the survey (January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2002). Information about sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy procedures conducted in physician offices were abstracted from medical records. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, agreement, and kappa statistics were calculated using the medical record as the gold standard. Agreement on specific procedure type and purpose was also assessed.
RESULTS: Agreement between claim and medical record regarding whether an endoscopic procedure had been done was high (over 90%). Agreement between self report and medical record and between self report and claim was good (79% and 74%, respectively). All three data sources adequately distinguished the type of procedure done. None of the data sources showed reliable levels of agreement regarding procedure purpose (screening or diagnostic).
CONCLUSION: Medicare claims can provide accurate information on whether a patient has undergone colorectal endoscopy and may be more complete than physician medical records. Medicare claims cannot be used to distinguish screening from diagnostic tests. Recognizing this limitation, researchers who use Medicare claims to assess rates of colorectal testing should include both screening and diagnostic endoscopy procedures in their analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17932360     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0123

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


  54 in total

1.  Screening rates for colorectal cancer in Canada: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; Charles N Bernstein; Jewel N Samadder; Rashid Ahmed
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2015-04-02

2.  Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behaviors among Appalachian residents.

Authors:  Paul L Reiter; Mira L Katz; Jill M Oliveri; Gregory S Young; Adana A Llanos; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  Public Health Nurs       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 1.462

3.  U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and cancer screening among female Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Racquel E Kohler; Gail A Jensen; Stacey L Sheridan; William R Carpenter; Andrea K Biddle
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2013-11-06       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Factors associated with Hispanic/non-Hispanic white colorectal cancer screening disparities.

Authors:  Anthony F Jerant; Rose E Arellanes; Peter Franks
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-24       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Regional variation in colorectal cancer testing and geographic availability of care in a publicly insured population.

Authors:  Stephanie B Wheeler; Tzy-Mey Kuo; Ravi K Goyal; Anne-Marie Meyer; Kristen Hassmiller Lich; Emily M Gillen; Seth Tyree; Carmen L Lewis; Trisha M Crutchfield; Christa E Martens; Florence Tangka; Lisa C Richardson; Michael P Pignone
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 4.078

6.  Validation of colonoscopic findings from a structured endoscopic documentation database against manually collected medical records data.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Danielle La Selva; Jae-Myung Cha; Michael Gluck; Andrew Ross; Michael Chiorean; Richard A Kozarek
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Accuracy of administrative claims data for polypectomy.

Authors:  Jonathan M Wyse; Lawrence Joseph; Alan N Barkun; Maida J Sewitch
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Karissa A Hahn; Shawna V Hudson; Eric K Shaw; Jesse C Crosson; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: recommendations and practices, 2006-2007.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; David Lanier; Marion R Nadel; Caroline McLeod; Gigi Yuan; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  Accuracy of self-reported reason for colorectal cancer testing.

Authors:  Jan M Eberth; Sally W Vernon; Arica White; Peter N Abotchie; Sharon P Coan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.