Sameer D Saini1,2,3, Adam A Powell4,5, Jason A Dominitz6, Deborah A Fisher7,8, Joseph Francis9, Linda Kinsinger10, Kathleen S Pittman10, Philip Schoenfeld11,12,13, Stephanie E Moser11,14, Sandeep Vijan11,12,13, Eve A Kerr11,12,13. 1. Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), 2215 Fuller Road, 111D, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. sdsaini@umich.edu. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. sdsaini@umich.edu. 3. Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. sdsaini@umich.edu. 4. Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research (CCDOR), Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 5. Anthem, Inc, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 6. VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. 7. Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 8. Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. 9. VHA Office of Analytics and Business Intelligence, Washington, DC, USA. 10. VHA National Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Durham, NC, USA. 11. Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), 2215 Fuller Road, 111D, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. 12. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 13. Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 14. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most existing performance measures focus on underuse of care, but there is growing interest in identifying and reducing overuse. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a valid and reliable electronic performance measure of overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VA), and to quantify overuse in VA. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study with multiple cross-sections. SUBJECTS: U.S. Veterans who underwent screening colonoscopy between 2011 and 2013. MAIN MEASURES: Overuse of screening colonoscopy, using a validated electronic measure developed by an expert workgroup. KEY RESULTS: Compared to results obtained from manual record review, the electronic measure was highly specific (97 %) for overuse, but not sensitive (20 %). After exclusion of diagnostic and high-risk screening or surveillance procedures, the validated electronic measure identified 88,754 average-risk screening colonoscopies performed in VA during 2013. Of these, 20,530 (23 %) met the definition for probable (17 %) or possible (6 %) overuse. Substantial variation in colonoscopy overuse was noted between Veterans Integrated Care Networks (VISNs) and between facilities, with a nearly twofold difference between the maximum and minimum rates of overuse at the VISN level and a nearly eightfold difference at the facility level. Overuse at the VISN and facility level was relatively stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Overuse of screening colonoscopy can be measured reliably and with high specificity using electronic data, and is common in a large integrated healthcare system. Overuse measures, such as those we have specified through a consensus workgroup process, could be combined with underuse measures to improve the appropriateness of colorectal cancer screening.
BACKGROUND: Most existing performance measures focus on underuse of care, but there is growing interest in identifying and reducing overuse. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a valid and reliable electronic performance measure of overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VA), and to quantify overuse in VA. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study with multiple cross-sections. SUBJECTS: U.S. Veterans who underwent screening colonoscopy between 2011 and 2013. MAIN MEASURES: Overuse of screening colonoscopy, using a validated electronic measure developed by an expert workgroup. KEY RESULTS: Compared to results obtained from manual record review, the electronic measure was highly specific (97 %) for overuse, but not sensitive (20 %). After exclusion of diagnostic and high-risk screening or surveillance procedures, the validated electronic measure identified 88,754 average-risk screening colonoscopies performed in VA during 2013. Of these, 20,530 (23 %) met the definition for probable (17 %) or possible (6 %) overuse. Substantial variation in colonoscopy overuse was noted between Veterans Integrated Care Networks (VISNs) and between facilities, with a nearly twofold difference between the maximum and minimum rates of overuse at the VISN level and a nearly eightfold difference at the facility level. Overuse at the VISN and facility level was relatively stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Overuse of screening colonoscopy can be measured reliably and with high specificity using electronic data, and is common in a large integrated healthcare system. Overuse measures, such as those we have specified through a consensus workgroup process, could be combined with underuse measures to improve the appropriateness of colorectal cancer screening.
Entities:
Keywords:
colorectal cancer; health services research; performance measurement; screening
Authors: Cary P Gross; Pamela R Soulos; Joseph S Ross; Laura D Cramer; Christopher Guerrero; Mary E Tinetti; R Scott Braithwaite Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-08-13 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Adam A Powell; Katie M White; Melissa R Partin; Krysten Halek; Jon B Christianson; Brian Neil; Sylvia J Hysong; Edwin J Zarling; Hanna E Bloomfield Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Joan L Warren; Carrie N Klabunde; Angela B Mariotto; Angela Meekins; Marie Topor; Martin L Brown; David F Ransohoff Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-06-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Shrujal S Baxi; Minal Kale; Salomeh Keyhani; Benjamin R Roman; Annie Yang; Antonio P Derosa; Deborah Korenstein Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Julian Brunner; Emmeline Chuang; Caroline Goldzweig; Cindy L Cain; Catherine Sugar; Elizabeth M Yano Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Kelsey Chalmers; Sallie-Anne Pearson; Tim Badgery-Parker; Jonathan Brett; Ian A Scott; Adam G Elshaug Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Linnaea Schuttner; Bjarni Haraldsson; Charles Maynard; Christian D Helfrich; Ashok Reddy; Toral Parikh; Karin M Nelson; Edwin Wong Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-10-01
Authors: Marc S Piper; Jennifer K Maratt; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Carmen Lewis; Jane Forman; Sandeep Vijan; Valbona Metko; Sameer D Saini Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-12-07
Authors: Thomas R Radomski; Robert Feldman; Yan Huang; Florentina E Sileanu; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-09-01