Okeefe L Simmons1, Yuan Feng2, Neehar D Parikh2, Amit G Singal3. 1. Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: amit.singal@utsouthwestern.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Low rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance are primarily due to provider-related process failures. However, few studies have evaluated primary care provider (PCP) practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance at academic tertiary care referral centers. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of PCPs at 2 tertiary care referral centers (133 providers) from June 2017 through December 2017. The survey was adapted from pretested surveys and included questions about practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance. We used the Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests to identify factors associated with adherence to HCC surveillance recommendations, for categoric and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: We obtained a provider-level response rate of 75% and clinic-level response rate of 100% (133 providers). Whereas most PCPs performed HCC surveillance themselves, one-third deferred surveillance to subspecialists and referred patients to a hepatology clinic. Providers believed the combination of ultrasound and α-fetoprotein analysis to be highly effective for early stage tumor detection and reported using the combination for assessment of most patients. However, PCPs were more likely to use computed tomography- or magnetic resonance imaging-based surveillance for patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or decompensated cirrhosis. Most providers believed HCC surveillance to be efficacious for early tumor detection and increasing survival. However, they desired increased high-quality evidence to characterize screening benefits and harms. Providers expressed notable misconceptions about HCC surveillance, including the role for measurement of liver enzyme levels in HCC surveillance and cost effectiveness of surveillance in patients without cirrhosis. They also reported barriers, including not being up to date on HCC surveillance recommendations, limited time in the clinic, and competing clinical concerns. CONCLUSIONS: In a web-based survey, PCPs reported misconceptions and barriers to HCC surveillance. This indicates the need for interventions, including provider education, to improve HCC surveillance effectiveness in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Low rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance are primarily due to provider-related process failures. However, few studies have evaluated primary care provider (PCP) practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance at academic tertiary care referral centers. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of PCPs at 2 tertiary care referral centers (133 providers) from June 2017 through December 2017. The survey was adapted from pretested surveys and included questions about practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance. We used the Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests to identify factors associated with adherence to HCC surveillance recommendations, for categoric and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: We obtained a provider-level response rate of 75% and clinic-level response rate of 100% (133 providers). Whereas most PCPs performed HCC surveillance themselves, one-third deferred surveillance to subspecialists and referred patients to a hepatology clinic. Providers believed the combination of ultrasound and α-fetoprotein analysis to be highly effective for early stage tumor detection and reported using the combination for assessment of most patients. However, PCPs were more likely to use computed tomography- or magnetic resonance imaging-based surveillance for patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or decompensated cirrhosis. Most providers believed HCC surveillance to be efficacious for early tumor detection and increasing survival. However, they desired increased high-quality evidence to characterize screening benefits and harms. Providers expressed notable misconceptions about HCC surveillance, including the role for measurement of liver enzyme levels in HCC surveillance and cost effectiveness of surveillance in patients without cirrhosis. They also reported barriers, including not being up to date on HCC surveillance recommendations, limited time in the clinic, and competing clinical concerns. CONCLUSIONS: In a web-based survey, PCPs reported misconceptions and barriers to HCC surveillance. This indicates the need for interventions, including provider education, to improve HCC surveillance effectiveness in clinical practice.
Authors: Julie K Heimbach; Laura M Kulik; Richard S Finn; Claude B Sirlin; Michael M Abecassis; Lewis R Roberts; Andrew X Zhu; M Hassan Murad; Jorge A Marrero Journal: Hepatology Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 17.425
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: O Simmons; D T Fetzer; T Yokoo; J A Marrero; A Yopp; Y Kono; N D Parikh; T Browning; A G Singal Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Amit G Singal; Adam C Yopp; Samir Gupta; Celette Sugg Skinner; Ethan A Halm; Eucharia Okolo; Mahendra Nehra; William M Lee; Jorge A Marrero; Jasmin A Tiro Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2012-07-30
Authors: Nicole E Rich; Ju Dong Yang; Ponni V Perumalswami; Naim Alkhouri; Whitney Jackson; Neehar D Parikh; Neil Mehta; Reena Salgia; Andres Duarte-Rojo; Laura Kulik; Mina Rakoski; Adnan Said; Omobonike Oloruntoba; George N Ioannou; Maarouf A Hoteit; Andrew M Moon; Amol S Rangnekar; Sheila L Eswaran; Elizabeth Zheng; Janice H Jou; James Hanje; Anjana Pillai; Ruben Hernaez; Robert Wong; Steven Scaglione; Hrishikesh Samant; Devika Kapuria; Shaun Chandna; Russell Rosenblatt; Veeral Ajmera; Catherine T Frenette; Sanjaya K Satapathy; Parvez Mantry; Prasun Jalal; Binu V John; Oren K Fix; Michael Leise; Christina C Lindenmeyer; Avegail Flores; Nayan Patel; Z Gordon Jiang; Nyan Latt; Renumathy Dhanasekaran; Mobolaji Odewole; Sofia Kagan; Jorge A Marrero; Amit G Singal Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Joshua P Kronenfeld; Emily L Ryon; David Goldberg; Rachel M Lee; Adam Yopp; Annie Wang; Ann Y Lee; Sommer Luu; Cary Hsu; Eric Silberfein; Maria C Russell; Alan S Livingstone; Nipun B Merchant; Neha Goel Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Nicole J Kim; Karine Rozenberg-Ben-Dror; David A Jacob; Nicole E Rich; Amit G Singal; Elizabeth S Aby; Ju Dong Yang; Veronica Nguyen; Anjana Pillai; Michael Fuchs; Andrew M Moon; Hersh Shroff; Parul D Agarwal; Ponni Perumalswami; Shaun Chandna; Kali Zhou; Yuval A Patel; Nyan L Latt; Robert Wong; Andres Duarte-Rojo; Christina C Lindenmeyer; Catherine Frenette; Jin Ge; Neil Mehta; Francis Yao; Jihane N Benhammou; Patricia P Bloom; Michael Leise; Hyun-Seok Kim; Cynthia Levy; Abbey Barnard; Mandana Khalili; George N Ioannou Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Amit G Singal; Anna S Lok; Ziding Feng; Fasiha Kanwal; Neehar D Parikh Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-09-19 Impact factor: 11.382