Literature DB >> 19139444

Reasons patients with a positive fecal occult blood test result do not undergo complete diagnostic evaluation.

Masahito Jimbo1, Ronald E Myers, Birgit Meyer, Terry Hyslop, James Cocroft, Barbara J Turner, David S Weinberg.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Screening for fecal occult blood reduces colorectal cancer mortality by identifying patients with positive results for complete diagnostic evaluation (CDE). CDE rates are suboptimal, however. We sought to determine common reasons for nonperformance of a CDE as recorded by the primary care physician.
METHODS: We undertook a descriptive analysis of reasons reported by physicians for nonperformance of CDE in a nested sample of patients with positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) results from a randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the impact of a physician intervention (CDE reminder-feedback and educational outreach) on recommendation and performance rates in primary care practices. Inspection of administrative data for 1,468 patients with positive results showed that 661 (45%) did not undergo CDE. We reviewed patient follow-up forms, which were completed by physicians for patients who did not have a CDE, to identify reasons for nonperformance.
RESULTS: Nonperformance of CDE was due to physician decision for 217 patients (33%). In 123 patients (19%), reasons for nonperformance were compatible with the guidelines, and in 94 patients (14%), they were not. Reasons wholly or partially due to factors other than physician decision were noted in 212 patients (32%); physician action was considered to be appropriate in these patients. For the 232 patients (35%) without a clearly documented reason for CDE nonperformance, the appropriateness of the physicians' action could not be determined.
CONCLUSIONS: Decision making by primary care physicians had a major effect on nonperformance of CDE after a positive FOBT result. Colorectal cancer screening programs should include guidance for physicians about when a CDE should and should not be performed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19139444      PMCID: PMC2625842          DOI: 10.1370/afm.906

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Fam Med        ISSN: 1544-1709            Impact factor:   5.166


  27 in total

1.  Measuring complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  R E Myers; G Fishbein; T Hyslop; W W Hauck; M Kutch; J R Grana; N Schlackman
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  2001

2.  Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendation and rationale.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-07-16       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Optimal dietary conditions for hemoccult testing.

Authors:  F A Macrae; D J St John; P Caligiore; L S Taylor; J W Legge
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1982-05       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening: research design and baseline findings.

Authors:  R E Myers; B Turner; D Weinberg; W W Hauck; T Hyslop; T Brigham; T Rothermel; J Grana; N Schlackman
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance practices by primary care physicians: results of a national survey.

Authors:  V K Sharma; R Vasudeva; C W Howden
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Physician-reported reasons for limited follow-up of patients with a positive fecal occult blood test screening result.

Authors:  Nadeem Baig; Ronald E Myers; Barbara J Turner; James Grana; Todd Rothermel; Neil Schlackman; David S Weinberg
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Fecal occult blood testing in a general medical clinic: comparison between guaiac-based and immunochemical-based tests.

Authors:  Cynthia W Ko; Jason A Dominitz; Toan D Nguyen
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2003-08-01       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence.

Authors:  Sidney Winawer; Robert Fletcher; Douglas Rex; John Bond; Randall Burt; Joseph Ferrucci; Theodore Ganiats; Theodore Levin; Steven Woolf; David Johnson; Lynne Kirk; Scott Litin; Clifford Simmang
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Impact of a physician-oriented intervention on follow-up in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Ronald E Myers; Barbara Turner; David Weinberg; Terry Hyslop; Walter W Hauck; Timothy Brigham; Todd Rothermel; James Grana; Neil Schlackman
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology.

Authors:  Bernard Levin; David A Lieberman; Beth McFarland; Robert A Smith; Durado Brooks; Kimberly S Andrews; Chiranjeev Dash; Francis M Giardiello; Seth Glick; Theodore R Levin; Perry Pickhardt; Douglas K Rex; Alan Thorson; Sidney J Winawer
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2008-03-05       Impact factor: 508.702

View more
  26 in total

1.  The aftermath of efficacy.

Authors:  Alfred O Berg
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

2.  The complexity of and opportunity for screening in primary care.

Authors:  Kurt C Stange
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  A randomized trial comparing the effect of two phone-based interventions on colorectal cancer screening adherence.

Authors:  Usha Menon; Rhonda Belue; Stéphanie Wahab; Kathryn Rugen; Anita Y Kinney; Peter Maramaldi; Debra Wujcik; Laura A Szalacha
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2011-12

4.  Optimizing the Quality of the Colorectal Cancer Screening Continuum: A Call to Action.

Authors:  Samir Gupta; Jesse Nodora
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 5.  Factors in quality care--the case of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests--problems in the steps and interfaces of care.

Authors:  Jane Zapka; Stephen H Taplin; Rebecca Anhang Price; Caroline Cranos; Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2010

Review 6.  Bringing an organizational perspective to the optimal number of colorectal cancer screening options debate.

Authors:  Melissa R Partin; Adam A Powell; Diana J Burgess; Timothy J Wilt
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Applying operations research to optimize a novel population management system for cancer screening.

Authors:  Adrian H Zai; Seokjin Kim; Arnold Kamis; Ken Hung; Jeremiah G Ronquillo; Henry C Chueh; Steven J Atlas
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 4.497

8.  Fecal occult blood testing beliefs and practices of U.S. primary care physicians: serious deviations from evidence-based recommendations.

Authors:  Marion R Nadel; Zahava Berkowitz; Carrie N Klabunde; Robert A Smith; Steven S Coughlin; Mary C White
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-04-10       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Improving hepatocellular carcinoma screening: applying lessons from colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Amit G Singal; Jasmin A Tiro; Samir Gupta
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 11.382

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.