Literature DB >> 20937917

Lack of follow-up after fecal occult blood testing in older adults: inappropriate screening or failure to follow up?

Charlotte M Carlson1, Katharine A Kirby, Michele A Casadei, Melissa R Partin, Christine E Kistler, Louise C Walter.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether lack of follow-up after screening fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in older adults is due to screening patients whose comorbidity or preferences do not permit follow-up vs failure to complete follow-up in healthy patients.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 2410 patients 70 years or older screened with FOBT was conducted at 4 Veteran Affairs (VA) medical centers from January 1 to December 31, 2001. The main outcome measure was receipt of follow-up within 1 year of FOBT based on national VA and Medicare data. For patients with positive FOBT results, age and Charlson comorbidity scores were evaluated as potential predictors of receiving a complete colon evaluation (colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema), and medical records were reviewed to determine reasons for lack of follow-up.
RESULTS: A total of 212 patients (9%) had positive FOBT results; 42% received a complete colon evaluation within 1 year. Age and comorbidity were not associated with receipt of a complete follow-up, which was similar among patients 70 to 74 years old with a Charlson score of 0 compared with patients 80 years or older with a Charlson score of 1 or higher (48% vs 41%; P=.28). The VA site, number of positive FOBT cards, and number of VA outpatient visits were predictors. Of 122 patients who did not receive a complete follow-up within 1 year, 38% had documentation that comorbidity or preferences did not permit follow-up, and over the next 5 years 76% never received a complete follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: While follow-up after positive FOBT results was low regardless of age or comorbidity, screening patients in whom complete evaluation would not be pursued substantially contributes to lack of follow-up. Efforts to improve follow-up should address the full chain of decision making, including decisions to screen and decisions to follow up. ©2011 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20937917      PMCID: PMC3021762          DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.372

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-9926


  35 in total

Review 1.  Cancer screening in the United States, 2009: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening.

Authors:  Robert A Smith; Vilma Cokkinides; Otis W Brawley
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

2.  A national survey of primary care physicians' methods for screening for fecal occult blood.

Authors:  Marion R Nadel; Jean A Shapiro; Carrie N Klabunde; Laura C Seeff; Robert Uhler; Robert A Smith; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-01-18       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Factors that influence the decision to do an adequate evaluation of a patient with a positive stool for occult blood.

Authors:  H M Shields; M S Weiner; D R Henry; J A Lloyd; B J Ransil; D A Lamphier; D W Gallagher; D A Antonioli; B A Rosner
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Veterans' access to and use of Medicare and Veterans Affairs health care.

Authors:  Denise M Hynes; Kristin Koelling; Kevin Stroupe; Noreen Arnold; Katherine Mallin; Min-Woong Sohn; Frances M Weaver; Larry Manheim; Linda Kok
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making.

Authors:  L C Walter; K E Covinsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-06       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-11-30       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Physician-patient communication about colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Michael S Wolf; David W Baker; Gregory Makoul
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-09-13       Impact factor: 5.128

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

Authors:  Masahito Jimbo; Ronald E Myers; Birgit Meyer; Terry Hyslop; James Cocroft; Barbara J Turner; David S Weinberg
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

9.  Validation of a combined comorbidity index.

Authors:  M Charlson; T P Szatrowski; J Peterson; J Gold
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Pitfalls of converting practice guidelines into quality measures: lessons learned from a VA performance measure.

Authors:  Louise C Walter; Natalie P Davidowitz; Paul A Heineken; Kenneth E Covinsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-05-26       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  27 in total

1.  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

2.  Inadequate Utilization of Diagnostic Colonoscopy Following Abnormal FIT Results in an Integrated Safety-Net System.

Authors:  Rachel B Issaka; Maneesh H Singh; Sachiko M Oshima; Victoria J Laleau; Carly D Rachocki; Ellen H Chen; Lukejohn W Day; Urmimala Sarkar; Ma Somsouk
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-12-13       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Contribution of patient, physician, and environmental factors to demographic and health variation in colonoscopy follow-up for abnormal colorectal cancer screening test results.

Authors:  Melissa R Partin; Amy A Gravely; James F Burgess; David A Haggstrom; Sarah E Lillie; David B Nelson; Sean M Nugent; Aasma Shaukat; Shahnaz Sultan; Louise C Walter; Diana J Burgess
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Reasons for Lack of Diagnostic Colonoscopy After Positive Result on Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Safety-Net Health System.

Authors:  Jason Martin; Ethan A Halm; Jasmin A Tiro; Zahra Merchant; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Katharine McCallister; Joanne M Sanders; Chul Ahn; Wendy Pechero Bishop; Amit G Singal
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 4.965

5.  Long-term outcomes following positive fecal occult blood test results in older adults: benefits and burdens.

Authors:  Christine E Kistler; Katharine A Kirby; Delia Lee; Michele A Casadei; Louise C Walter
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2011-05-09

6.  Making FIT Count: Maximizing Appropriate Use of the Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs.

Authors:  Vivy T Cusumano; Folasade P May
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  A pilot study to examine colorectal cancer screening in two assisted living communities.

Authors:  Kathryn L Moore; Carmen L Lewis; Sheryl Zimmerman; Kimberly Ward; David Reed; Robert Rodriguez; Christine E Kistler
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 5.562

8.  Trends in Wait Time for Outpatient Colonoscopy in the Veterans Health Administration, 2008-2015.

Authors:  Megan A Adams; Joel H Rubenstein; Rachel Lipson; Robert G Holleman; Sameer D Saini
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Time to Colonoscopy after Positive Fecal Blood Test in Four U.S. Health Care Systems.

Authors:  Jessica Chubak; Michael P Garcia; Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Yingye Zheng; Douglas A Corley; Ethan A Halm; Amit G Singal; Carrie N Klabunde; Chyke A Doubeni; Aruna Kamineni; Theodore R Levin; Joanne E Schottinger; Beverly B Green; Virginia P Quinn; Carolyn M Rutter
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Assessing adherence and cost-benefit of colorectal cancer screening for accountable providers.

Authors:  Trace Heavener; Frank W McStay; Victoria Jaeger; Kristen Stephenson; Lauren Sager; James Sing
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-08-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.