Literature DB >> 19550418

Missed opportunities to initiate endoscopic evaluation for colorectal cancer diagnosis.

Hardeep Singh1, Kuang Daci, Laura A Petersen, Clyde Collins, Nancy J Petersen, Anila Shethia, Hashem B El-Serag.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Delayed diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most common reasons for ambulatory diagnostic malpractice claims in the United States. Our objective was to describe missed opportunities to diagnose CRC before endoscopic referral, in terms of patient characteristics, nature of clinical clues, and types of diagnostic-process breakdowns involved.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive, newly diagnosed cases of CRC between February 1999 and June 2007 at a tertiary health-care system in Texas. Two reviewers independently evaluated the electronic record of each patient using a standardized pretested data collection instrument. Missed opportunities were defined as care episodes in which endoscopic evaluation was not initiated despite the presence of one or more clues that warrant a diagnostic workup for CRC. Predictors of missed opportunities were evaluated in logistic regression. The types of breakdowns involved in the diagnostic process were also determined and described.
RESULTS: Of the 513 patients with CRC who met the inclusion criteria, both reviewers agreed on the presence of at least one missed opportunity in 161 patients. Among these patients there was a mean of 4.2 missed opportunities and 5.3 clues. The most common clues were suspected or confirmed iron deficiency anemia, positive fecal occult blood test, and hematochezia. The odds of a missed opportunity were increased in patients older than 75 years (odds ratio (OR)=2.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-4.1) or with iron deficiency anemia (OR=2.2; 95% CI 1.3-3.6), whereas the odds of a missed opportunity were lower in patients with abnormal flexible sigmoidoscopy (OR=0.06; 95% CI 0.01-0.51), or imaging suspicious for CRC (OR=0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). Anemia was the clue associated with the longest time to endoscopic referral (median=393 days). Most process breakdowns occurred in the provider-patient clinical encounter and in the follow-up of patients or abnormal diagnostic test results.
CONCLUSIONS: Missed opportunities to initiate workup for CRC are common despite the presence of many clues suggestive of CRC diagnosis. Future interventions are needed to reduce the process breakdowns identified.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19550418      PMCID: PMC2758321          DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2009.324

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  43 in total

1.  The reliability of medical record review for estimating adverse event rates.

Authors:  Eric J Thomas; Stuart R Lipsitz; David M Studdert; Troyen A Brennan
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-06-04       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Diagnostic delay in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  M A Potter; R G Wilson
Journal:  J R Coll Surg Edinb       Date:  1999-10

3.  Hindsight not equal to foresight: the effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. 1975.

Authors:  B Fischhoff
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-08

4.  Implications of delayed diagnosis in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  C J Young; J L Sweeney; A Hunter
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  2000-09

5.  Delay in treatment of colorectal cancer: multifactorial problem.

Authors:  Mike Ralf Langenbach; Johannes Schmidt; Jürgen Neumann; Hubert Zirngibl
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2003-02-27       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Iron deficiency anemia in the elderly: prevalence and endoscopic evaluation of the gastrointestinal tract in outpatients.

Authors:  Erkan Coban; Ayşen Timuragaoglu; Mehmet Meriç
Journal:  Acta Haematol       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.195

Review 7.  Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results.

Authors:  K Robin Yabroff; Kathleen Shakira Washington; Amy Leader; Elizabeth Neilson; Jeanne Mandelblatt
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.929

8.  Prediction of colorectal cancer by a patient consultation questionnaire and scoring system: a prospective study.

Authors:  S N Selvachandran; R J Hodder; M S Ballal; P Jones; D Cade
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-07-27       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Iron-deficiency anaemia and delay in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  P L Acher; T Al-Mishlab; M Rahman; T Bates
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.788

10.  Diagnosis of colorectal cancer in primary care: the evidence base for guidelines.

Authors:  William Hamilton; Deborah Sharp
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.267

View more
  62 in total

1.  Characteristics and predictors of missed opportunities in lung cancer diagnosis: an electronic health record-based study.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Kamal Hirani; Himabindu Kadiyala; Olga Rudomiotov; Traber Davis; Myrna M Khan; Terry L Wahls
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  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

3.  Legal, ethical, and financial dilemmas in electronic health record adoption and use.

Authors:  Dean F Sittig; Hardeep Singh
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Appraisal of emerging symptoms of colorectal cancer: associations with dispositional, demographic, and tumor characteristics.

Authors:  Stephen L Ristvedt; Sandi L Pruitt; Kathryn M Trinkaus
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2013-05-28

5.  Pilot Study: Neurocognitive Disorders and Colonoscopy in Older Adults.

Authors:  Franchesca Arias; Michael Riverso; Shellie-Anne Levy; Rebecca Armstrong; David S Estores; Patrick Tighe; Catherine C Price
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 5.108

Review 6.  The impact of health information technology on cancer care across the continuum: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Will L Tarver; Nir Menachemi
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 7.  Guideline for referral of patients with suspected colorectal cancer by family physicians and other primary care providers.

Authors:  M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Emily T Vella; Amanda Hey; Marko Simunovic; William Harris; Cheryl Levitt
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Do diagnostic and treatment delays for colorectal cancer increase risk of death?

Authors:  Sandi L Pruitt; Amy Jo Harzke; Nicholas O Davidson; Mario Schootman
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Types and origins of diagnostic errors in primary care settings.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Traber Davis Giardina; Ashley N D Meyer; Samuel N Forjuoh; Michael D Reis; Eric J Thomas
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-03-25       Impact factor: 21.873

10.  Patient-Reported Attributions for Missed Colonoscopy Appointments in Two Large Healthcare Systems.

Authors:  Viraj Bhise; Varsha Modi; Anisha Kalavar; Donna Espadas; Loretta Hanser; Milena Gould; Hashem B El-Serag; Hardeep Singh
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.