Caitlin C Murphy1, Robert S Sandler2, Janet M Grubber3, Marcus R Johnson4, Deborah A Fisher3. 1. Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Electronic address: caitlin_murphy@med.unc.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 3. Durham VA Health Services Research and Development Center, Durham, North Carolina; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 4. Durham VA Health Services Research and Development Center, Durham, North Carolina; VA Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Regular screening with colonoscopy lowers colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. We aimed to determine patterns of repeat and surveillance colonoscopy and identify factors associated with overuse and underuse of colonoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed data from participants in a previous Veterans Health Administration (VHA) study who underwent outpatient colonoscopy at 25 VHA facilities between October 2007 and September 2008 (n = 1455). The proportion of patients who received a follow-up colonoscopy was calculated for 3 risk groups, which were defined on the basis of the index colonoscopy: no adenoma, low-risk adenoma, or high-risk adenoma. RESULTS: Colonoscopy was overused (used more frequently than intervals recommended by guidelines) by 16% of patients with no adenomas, 26% with low-risk adenomas, and 29% with high-risk adenomas. Most patients with high-risk adenomas (54%) underwent colonoscopy after the recommended interval or did not undergo colonoscopy. Patients who received a follow-up recommendation that was discordant with guidelines were more likely to undergo colonoscopy too early (no adenoma odds ratio [OR], 3.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.31-6.25 and low-risk adenoma OR, 5.28; 95% CI, 1.88-14.83). Receipt of colonoscopy at nonacademic facilities was associated with overuse among patients without adenomas (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 1.96-14.29) or with low-risk adenomas (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.52-7.69). Performance of colonoscopies by general surgeons vs gastroenterologists (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.02-4.23) and female sex of the patient (OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.06-10.16) were associated with overuse of colonoscopy for patients with low-risk adenomas. No factors examined were associated with underuse of colonoscopy among patients with high-risk adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of patients in the VHA system, more than one fourth of patients with low-risk adenomas received follow-up colonoscopies too early, whereas more than one half of those with high-risk adenomas did not undergo surveillance colonoscopy as recommended. Our findings highlight the need for system-level improvements to facilitate the appropriate delivery of colonoscopy that is based on individual risk.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Regular screening with colonoscopy lowers colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. We aimed to determine patterns of repeat and surveillance colonoscopy and identify factors associated with overuse and underuse of colonoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed data from participants in a previous Veterans Health Administration (VHA) study who underwent outpatient colonoscopy at 25 VHA facilities between October 2007 and September 2008 (n = 1455). The proportion of patients who received a follow-up colonoscopy was calculated for 3 risk groups, which were defined on the basis of the index colonoscopy: no adenoma, low-risk adenoma, or high-risk adenoma. RESULTS: Colonoscopy was overused (used more frequently than intervals recommended by guidelines) by 16% of patients with no adenomas, 26% with low-risk adenomas, and 29% with high-risk adenomas. Most patients with high-risk adenomas (54%) underwent colonoscopy after the recommended interval or did not undergo colonoscopy. Patients who received a follow-up recommendation that was discordant with guidelines were more likely to undergo colonoscopy too early (no adenoma odds ratio [OR], 3.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.31-6.25 and low-risk adenoma OR, 5.28; 95% CI, 1.88-14.83). Receipt of colonoscopy at nonacademic facilities was associated with overuse among patients without adenomas (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 1.96-14.29) or with low-risk adenomas (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.52-7.69). Performance of colonoscopies by general surgeons vs gastroenterologists (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.02-4.23) and female sex of the patient (OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.06-10.16) were associated with overuse of colonoscopy for patients with low-risk adenomas. No factors examined were associated with underuse of colonoscopy among patients with high-risk adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of patients in the VHA system, more than one fourth of patients with low-risk adenomas received follow-up colonoscopies too early, whereas more than one half of those with high-risk adenomas did not undergo surveillance colonoscopy as recommended. Our findings highlight the need for system-level improvements to facilitate the appropriate delivery of colonoscopy that is based on individual risk.
Authors: Michael V Maciosek; Leif I Solberg; Ashley B Coffield; Nichol M Edwards; Michael J Goodman Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Robert H Fletcher; Jonathon S Stillman; Michael J O'Brien; Bernard Levin; Robert A Smith; David A Lieberman; Randall W Burt; Theodore R Levin; John H Bond; Durado Brooks; Tim Byers; Neil Hyman; Lynne Kirk; Alan Thorson; Clifford Simmang; David Johnson; Douglas K Rex Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Laura C Seeff; Marion R Nadel; Carrie N Klabunde; Trevor Thompson; Jean A Shapiro; Sally W Vernon; Ralph J Coates Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Alex H Krist; Resa M Jones; Steven H Woolf; Sarah E Woessner; Daniel Merenstein; J William Kerns; Walter Foliaco; Paul Jackson Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Joseph C Anderson; John A Baron; Dennis J Ahnen; Elizabeth L Barry; Roberd M Bostick; Carol A Burke; Robert S Bresalier; Timothy R Church; Bernard F Cole; Marcia Cruz-Correa; Adam S Kim; Leila A Mott; Robert S Sandler; Douglas J Robertson Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Zachary Predmore; Jean Pannikottu; Ritu Sharma; Monica Tung; Stephanie Nothelle; Jodi B Segal Journal: Am J Med Qual Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 1.852
Authors: Melissa Magrath; Edward Yang; Chul Ahn; Christian A Mayorga; Purva Gopal; Caitlin C Murphy; Samir Gupta; Deepak Agrawal; Ethan A Halm; Eric K Borton; Celette Sugg Skinner; Amit G Singal Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Matthew A Kluge; J Lucas Williams; Connie K Wu; Brian C Jacobson; Paul C Schroy; David A Lieberman; Audrey H Calderwood Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Jeffrey K Lee; Christopher D Jensen; Theodore R Levin; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Jessica Chubak; Aruna S Kamineni; Joanne E Schottinger; Nirupa R Ghai; Natalia Udaltsova; Wei K Zhao; Bruce H Fireman; Charles P Quesenberry; E John Orav; Celette S Skinner; Ethan A Halm; Douglas A Corley Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Electra D Paskett; Brittany M Bernardo; Gregory S Young; Mira L Katz; Paul L Reiter; Cathy M Tatum; Jill M Oliveri; Cecilia R DeGraffinreid; Darrell Mason Gray; Rachel Pearlman; Heather Hampel Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jessica Chubak; Dale McLerran; Yingye Zheng; Amit G Singal; Douglas A Corley; V Paul Doria-Rose; Chyke A Doubeni; Aruna Kamineni; Jennifer S Haas; Ethan A Halm; Celette Sugg Skinner; Ann G Zauber; Karen J Wernli; Elisabeth F Beaber Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 4.254