Eimile Dalton-Fitzgerald1, Jasmin Tiro2, Pragathi Kandunoori1, Ethan A Halm3, Adam Yopp4, Amit G Singal5. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Internal Medicine, Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas. 2. Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Internal Medicine, Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas; Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 4. Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Internal Medicine, Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas; Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. Electronic address: amit.singal@utsouthwestern.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fewer than 20% of patients with cirrhosis undergo surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), therefore these tumors often are detected at late stages. Although primary care providers (PCPs) care for 60% of patients with cirrhosis in the United States, little is known about their practice patterns for HCC surveillance. We investigated factors associated with adherence to guidelines for HCC surveillance by PCPs. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of all 131 PCPs at a large urban hospital. The survey was derived from validated surveys and pretested among providers; it included questions about provider and practice characteristics, self-reported rates of surveillance, surveillance test and frequency preference, and attitudes and barriers to HCC surveillance. RESULTS: We obtained a clinic-level response rate of 100% and a provider-level response rate of 60%. Only 65% of respondents reported annual surveillance and 15% reported biannual surveillance of patients for HCC. Barriers to HCC surveillance included not being up-to-date with HCC guidelines (68% of PCPs), difficulties in communicating effectively with patients about HCC surveillance (56%), and more important issues to manage in the clinic (52%). Approximately half of PCPs (52%) reported using ultrasound or measurements of α-fetoprotein in surveillance; 96% said that this combination was effective in reducing HCC-related mortality. However, many providers incorrectly believed that clinical examination (45%) or levels of liver enzymes (59%) or α-fetoprotein alone (89%) were effective surveillance tools. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs have misconceptions about tests to detect HCC that contribute to ineffective surveillance. Reported barriers to surveillance include suboptimal knowledge about guidelines, indicating a need for interventions, including provider education, to increase HCC surveillance effectiveness.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fewer than 20% of patients with cirrhosis undergo surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), therefore these tumors often are detected at late stages. Although primary care providers (PCPs) care for 60% of patients with cirrhosis in the United States, little is known about their practice patterns for HCC surveillance. We investigated factors associated with adherence to guidelines for HCC surveillance by PCPs. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of all 131 PCPs at a large urban hospital. The survey was derived from validated surveys and pretested among providers; it included questions about provider and practice characteristics, self-reported rates of surveillance, surveillance test and frequency preference, and attitudes and barriers to HCC surveillance. RESULTS: We obtained a clinic-level response rate of 100% and a provider-level response rate of 60%. Only 65% of respondents reported annual surveillance and 15% reported biannual surveillance of patients for HCC. Barriers to HCC surveillance included not being up-to-date with HCC guidelines (68% of PCPs), difficulties in communicating effectively with patients about HCC surveillance (56%), and more important issues to manage in the clinic (52%). Approximately half of PCPs (52%) reported using ultrasound or measurements of α-fetoprotein in surveillance; 96% said that this combination was effective in reducing HCC-related mortality. However, many providers incorrectly believed that clinical examination (45%) or levels of liver enzymes (59%) or α-fetoprotein alone (89%) were effective surveillance tools. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs have misconceptions about tests to detect HCC that contribute to ineffective surveillance. Reported barriers to surveillance include suboptimal knowledge about guidelines, indicating a need for interventions, including provider education, to increase HCC surveillance effectiveness.
Authors: Theodore R Levin; Laura Jamieson; Daniel A Burley; Juan Reyes; Michael Oehrli; Cindy Caldwell Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Jessica A Davila; Robert O Morgan; Peter A Richardson; Xianglin L Du; Katherine A McGlynn; Hashem B El-Serag Journal: Hepatology Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Amit G Singal; Michael L Volk; Mina O Rakoski; Sherry Fu; Grace L Su; Heather McCurdy; Jorge A Marrero Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Jessica A Davila; Louise Henderson; Jennifer R Kramer; Fasiha Kanwal; Peter A Richardson; Zhigang Duan; Hashem B El-Serag Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: K Robin Yabroff; Carrie N Klabunde; Gigi Yuan; Timothy S McNeel; Martin L Brown; Dana Casciotti; Dennis W Buckman; Stephen Taplin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-10-14 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: A Singal; M L Volk; A Waljee; R Salgia; P Higgins; M A M Rogers; J A Marrero Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2009-04-08 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: M Walker; H B El-Serag; Y Sada; S Mittal; J Ying; Z Duan; P Richardson; J A Davila; F Kanwal Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Nicole E Rich; Caitlin Hester; Mobolaji Odewole; Caitlin C Murphy; Neehar D Parikh; Jorge A Marrero; Adam C Yopp; Amit G Singal Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Javier Tejeda-Maldonado; Ignacio García-Juárez; Jonathan Aguirre-Valadez; Adrián González-Aguirre; Mario Vilatobá-Chapa; Alejandra Armengol-Alonso; Francisco Escobar-Penagos; Aldo Torre; Juan Francisco Sánchez-Ávila; Diego Luis Carrillo-Pérez Journal: World J Hepatol Date: 2015-03-27
Authors: Kristina Tzartzeva; Joseph Obi; Nicole E Rich; Neehar D Parikh; Jorge A Marrero; Adam Yopp; Akbar K Waljee; Amit G Singal Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Amit G Singal; Jasmin A Tiro; Caitlin C Murphy; Jorge A Marrero; Katharine McCallister; Hannah Fullington; Caroline Mejias; Akbar K Waljee; Wendy Pechero Bishop; Noel O Santini; Ethan A Halm Journal: Hepatology Date: 2018-12-14 Impact factor: 17.425