Endoscopic follow-up of positive fecal occult blood testing in the Ontario FOBT Project

Examining the Factors That Affect the Diagnosis of Patients with Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test Results

Due to the threat of colorectal cancer (CRC) to health, Taiwan included the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) under preventive health services in 2010. We examined the factors that affect the diagnosis of people with positive FOBT results. Data were retrospectively collected from the CRC screening database. In the model predicting factors that affect the diagnosis of 89,046 people with positive FOBT results, the risks of disease in the CRC group were lower in medical institutions that conducted follow-up examinations in regions such as Northern Taiwan compared to that in Eastern Taiwan (p = 0.013); they were lower in the age group of 50 to 65 years than those in the age group of 71 to 75 years (p < 0.001, p = 0.016), and lower in the outpatient medical units that conducted follow-up examinations than those in the inpatient medical units by 0.565 times (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.493−0.647). Factors affecting the diagnosis of patients with positive FOBT results were gender, the region of the medical institution, medical unit for follow-up examinations, age, screening site, family history, type of follow-up examinations, and follow-up time. Therefore, the identification of characteristics of patients with positive FOBT results and the promotion of follow-up examination are important prevention strategies for CRC.

Factors affecting the follow-up time after a positive result in the fecal occult blood test

In 2010, Taiwan included the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) under preventive health insurance services. For patients whose test positive, receiving follow-ups is paramount. This study investigated factors affecting the follow-up time of these patients. This retrospective study used data from the colorectal cancer screening archives. The study period was from 2010 to 2013, and the subjects were 50-75-year-old persons who tested positive for FOBT. The t test, one-way ANOVA, and multiple regression were performed to address the differences in the mean tracking period between variables such as the population's demographic characteristics. The mean follow-up time for the 98,482 participants whose screening results were positive exhibited significant differences (p < 0.001) according to medical unit region and classification, age, screening location, family history, examination method, and diagnosis. The model predicting the mean follow-up time predicted a period of 10.079 days longer for those whose hospital was on an offshore island than that of those whose hospital was in the eastern regions. The follow-up time was 1.257 days shorter for people who were inpatients than those who were outpatients and was 8.902 days longer for people who underwent double contrast barium enema plus flexible sigmoidoscopy than those who underwent other examination methods. Patients with a family history of colorectal cancer and those whose examination results indicated cancer had a follow-up time of 2.562 and 2.476 days shorter than those who did not know their family history and those with other results, respectively. Factors affecting the follow-up time of people whose FOBT results were positive consisted of the location and classification of the follow-up institution, age, screening location, family history, examination method, and diagnosis. This provides valuable references for improving the cancer screening program.

Fecal Immunochemical Test as a Screening Method for Colorectal Cancer in University College Hospital Ibadan, Nigeria

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a disease of public health importance because of the increasing incidence of the disease and presentation in advanced stage of the disease in Western Africa. CRC is amenable to screening because of the long course of premalignant lesions before final development of the disease. Despite this, the practice of CRC screening is inadequate at the sites in this study. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is one of the recommended noninvasive methods for CRC screening. It has a sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 90%, and an overall accuracy of 95%. We aimed to determine the practicability of FIT for CRC screening in patients aged 40 to 75 years who attended primary care clinics in the University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 422 patients selected by systematic random sampling were recruited and offered free FIT screening. Participants with a positive finding had additional GI examination, including a digital rectal examination, proctoscopy, and colonoscopy, if no lesion was biopsied during proctoscopy.

RESULTS

The mean (± standard deviation) age of the respondents was 62 ± 9.61 years. The prevalence of a positive FIT in the study was 10.1%. The FIT was not completed by 3.8% of patients, and the rate of completion of additional evaluation after a positive FIT reduced as the investigations became invasive, with 36.8% and 71.1% noncompletion rates for proctoscopy and colonoscopy, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A FIT-based screening for age and risk-appropriate patients is practical in this environment, where the capacity and acceptability of colonoscopy are limited.

Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol

Background

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation.

Methods

This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase.

Discussion

There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study.

Trial registration

This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04514341) on 14 August 2020.

Association of time to colonoscopy after a positive fecal test result and fecal hemoglobin concentration with risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) and colorectal cancer (CRC) according to time to colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT), fecal hemoglobin concentration, and combination of both.

METHODS

We analyzed the records of 2362 patients aged ≥50 years who underwent colonoscopy because of a positive FIT result through the National Cancer Screening Program of Korea.

RESULTS

ACRN risk increased with increasing time to colonoscopy after a positive FIT (17.2%, 18.6%, 19.1%, 21.4%, and 27.2% in <30, 30-59, 60-149, 150-179, and ≥180 days; P = 0.034), and ACRN and CRC risk increased with increasing fecal hemoglobin concentration (ACRN, 13.2%, 16.9%, 18.5%, 23.2%, and 26.6%; CRC, 1.3%, 1.7%, 4.7%, 5.7%, and 12.8% with 100-200, 200-300, 300-500, 500-1000, and ≥1000 ng Hb/mL; both P < 0.001). Even after adjusting for confounders, follow-up after 180 days tended to be associated with a higher ACRN risk (adjusted odds ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-3.27), compared with follow-up colonoscopy at <30 days, and fecal hemoglobin 500-1000, and ≥1000 ng Hb/mL were associated with a significantly higher ACRN and CRC risk, compared with 100-200 ng Hb/mL. Moreover, the group with ≥180 days and ≥1000 ng Hb/mL had a much higher CRC risk compared with the group with <180 days and <1000 ng Hb/mL (12.45-fold; 95% CI, 3.73-41.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with positive FIT results, especially those with higher fecal hemoglobin levels, should undergo timely follow-up colonoscopy.

Effect of Colonoscopy Outreach vs Fecal Immunochemical Test Outreach on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results.

OBJECTIVE

Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings.

INTERVENTIONS

Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n = 2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n = 2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n = 1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation).

RESULTS

All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P < .001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .08 and P < .13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215.

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

BACKGROUND

Patient, physician, and environmental factors were identified, and the authors examined the contribution of these factors to demographic and health variation in colonoscopy follow-up after a positive fecal occult blood test/fecal immunochemical test (FOBT/FIT) screening.

METHODS

In total, 76,243 FOBT/FIT-positive patients were identified from 120 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities between August 16, 2009 and March 20, 2011 and were followed for 6 months. Patient demographic (race/ethnicity, sex, age, marital status) and health characteristics (comorbidities), physician characteristics (training level, whether primary care provider) and behaviors (inappropriate FOBT/FIT screening), and environmental factors (geographic access, facility type) were identified from VHA administrative records. Patient behaviors (refusal, private sector colonoscopy use) were estimated with statistical text mining conducted on clinic notes, and follow-up predictors and adjusted rates were estimated using hierarchical logistic regression.

RESULTS

Roughly 50% of individuals completed a colonoscopy at a VHA facility within 6 months. Age and comorbidity score were negatively associated with follow-up. Blacks were more likely to receive follow-up than whites. Environmental factors attenuated but did not fully account for these differences. Patient behaviors (refusal, private sector colonoscopy use) and physician behaviors (inappropriate screening) fully accounted for the small reverse race disparity and attenuated variation by age and comorbidity score. Patient behaviors (refusal and private sector colonoscopy use) contributed more to variation in follow-up rates than physician behaviors (inappropriate screening).

CONCLUSIONS

In the VHA, blacks are more likely to receive colonoscopy follow-up for positive FOBT/FIT results than whites, and follow-up rates markedly decline with advancing age and comorbidity burden. Patient and physician behaviors explain race variation in follow-up rates and contribute to variation by age and comorbidity burden. Cancer 2017;123:3502-12. Published 2017. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Association Between Time to Colonoscopy After a Positive Fecal Test Result and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer Stage at Diagnosis

IMPORTANCE

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is commonly used for colorectal cancer screening and positive test results require follow-up colonoscopy. However, follow-up intervals vary, which may result in neoplastic progression.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate time to colonoscopy after a positive FIT result and its association with risk of colorectal cancer and advanced-stage disease at diagnosis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective cohort study (January 1, 2010-December 31, 2014) within Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California. Participants were 70 124 patients aged 50 through 70 years eligible for colorectal cancer screening with a positive FIT result who had a follow-up colonoscopy.

EXPOSURES

Time (days) to colonoscopy after a positive FIT result.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Risk of any colorectal cancer and advanced-stage disease (defined as stage III and IV cancer). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were adjusted for patient demographics and baseline risk factors.

RESULTS

Of the 70 124 patients with positive FIT results (median age, 61 years [IQR, 55-67 years]; men, 52.7%), there were 2191 cases of any colorectal cancer and 601 cases of advanced-stage disease diagnosed. Compared with colonoscopy follow-up within 8 to 30 days (n = 27 176), there were no significant differences between follow-up at 2 months (n = 24 644), 3 months (n = 8666), 4 to 6 months (n = 5251), or 7 to 9 months (n = 1335) for risk of any colorectal cancer (cases per 1000 patients: 8-30 days, 30; 2 months, 28; 3 months, 31; 4-6 months, 31; and 7-9 months, 43) or advanced-stage disease (cases per 1000 patients: 8-30 days, 8; 2 months, 7; 3 months, 7; 4-6 months, 9; and 7-9 months, 13). Risks were significantly higher for examinations at 10 to 12 months (n = 748) for any colorectal cancer (OR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.05-2.08]; 49 cases per 1000 patients) and advanced-stage disease (OR, 1.97 [95% CI, 1.14-3.42]; 19 cases per 1000 patients) and more than 12 months (n = 747) for any colorectal cancer (OR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.89-2.68]; 76 cases per 1000 patients) and advanced-stage disease (OR, 3.22 [95% CI, 2.44-4.25]; 31 cases per 1000 patients).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with a positive fecal immunochemical test result, compared with follow-up colonoscopy at 8 to 30 days, follow-up after 10 months was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer and more advanced-stage disease at the time of diagnosis. Further research is needed to assess whether this relationship is causal.

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

BACKGROUND

To reduce colorectal cancer mortality, positive fecal blood tests must be followed by colonoscopy.

METHODS

We identified 62,384 individuals ages 50 to 89 years with a positive fecal blood test between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 in four health care systems within the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium. We estimated the probability of follow-up colonoscopy and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall differences in cumulative incidence of follow-up across health care systems were assessed with the log-rank test. HRs and 95% CIs were estimated from multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Most patients who received a colonoscopy did so within 6 months of their positive fecal blood test, although follow-up rates varied across health care systems (P <0.001). Median days to colonoscopy ranged from 41 (95% CI, 40-41) to 174 (95% CI, 123-343); percent followed-up by 12 months ranged from 58.1% (95% CI, 51.6%-63.7%) to 83.8% (95% CI, 83.4%-84.3%) and differences across health care systems were also observed at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months. Increasing age and comorbidity score were associated with lower follow-up rates.

CONCLUSION

Individual characteristics and health care system were associated with colonoscopy after positive fecal blood tests. Patterns were consistent across health care systems, but proportions of patients receiving follow-up varied. These findings suggest that there is room to improve follow-up of positive colorectal cancer screening tests.

IMPACT

Understanding the timing of colonoscopy after positive fecal blood tests and characteristics associated with lack of follow-up may inform future efforts to improve follow-up.

Lack of follow-up colonoscopy after positive FOBT in an organized colorectal cancer screening program is associated with modifiable health care practices

BACKGROUND

ColonCancerCheck (CCC), Ontario's organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, uses guaiac fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT). To reduce CRC-related mortality, persons with a positive gFOBT must have colonoscopy. We identified factors associated with failure to have colonoscopy within 6months of a positive gFOBT.

METHODS

Population-based, retrospective cohort analysis of CCC participants with positive gFOBT (April 2008 to December 2009) using health administrative data. Patient, physician and health care utilization factors associated with a lack of follow-up colonoscopy were identified using descriptive and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

There were 21,839 participants with a positive gFOBT; 14,091 (64%) had colonoscopy within 6months. The strongest factors associated with failure to follow-up were recent colonoscopy (in 2years prior vs. >10years or never, OR: 4.31, 95% C.I.: 3.82, 4.86), as well as repeat gFOBT (OR: 6.08, 95% C.I.: 5.46, 6.78) and hospital admission (OR: 4.35, 95% C.I.: 3.57, 5.26) in the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

In the first 18months of the CCC Program, 1/3 of those with a positive gFOBT did not have colonoscopy within 6months. Identification of potentially modifiable factors associated with failure to follow up lay the groundwork for interventions to address this critical quality gap.

Organizational predictors of colonoscopy follow-up for positive fecal occult blood test results: an observational study

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the contribution of organizational structures and processes identified from facility surveys to follow-up for positive fecal occult blood tests [FOBT-positive (FOBT(+))].

METHODS

We identified 74,104 patients with FOBT(+) results from 98 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities between August 16, 2009 and March 20, 2011, and followed them until September 30, 2011, for completion of colonoscopy. We identified patient characteristics from VHA administrative records, and organizational factors from facility surveys completed by primary care and gastroenterology chiefs. We estimated predictors of colonoscopy completion within 60 days and six months using hierarchical logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Thirty percent of patients with FOBT(+) results received colonoscopy within 60 days and 49% within six months. Having gastroenterology or laboratory staff notify gastroenterology providers directly about FOBT(+) cases was a significant predictor of 60-day [odds ratio (OR), 1.85; P = 0.01] and six-month follow-up (OR, 1.25; P = 0.008). Additional predictors of 60-day follow-up included adequacy of colonoscopy appointment availability (OR, 1.43; P = 0.01) and frequent individual feedback to primary care providers about FOBT(+) referral timeliness (OR, 1.79; P = 0.04). Additional predictors of six-month follow-up included using guideline-concordant surveillance intervals for low-risk adenomas (OR, 1.57; P = 0.01) and using group appointments and combined verbal-written methods for colonoscopy preparation instruction (OR, 1.48; P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Directly notifying gastroenterology providers about FOBT(+) results, using guideline-concordant adenoma surveillance intervals, and using colonoscopy preparations instruction methods that provide both verbal and written information may increase overall follow-up rates. Enhancing follow-up within 60 days may require increased colonoscopy capacity and feedback to primary care providers.

IMPACT

These findings may inform organizational-level interventions to improve FOBT(+) follow-up.

Effectiveness of an organized colorectal cancer screening program on increasing adherence in asymptomatic average-risk Canadians

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer and second highest cause of cancer-related mortality in Canada. Despite the availability of screening services and establishment of guidelines, utilization of colorectal cancer screening in Canada remains low. In 2008, the province of Ontario launched ColonCancerCheck, an organized colorectal cancer screening program aimed at increasing CRC screening adherence. In this study, we adopt a quasi-experimental approach to estimate and describe the impact of ColonCancerCheck on screening behavior in the asymptomatic average risk population.

Methods

Annual screening rates from the target population were estimated using five cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey, a cross-sectional nationally representative survey of health status, healthcare use, and determinants of health in the Canadian population. We used a difference-in-differences design to measure the overall impact of ColonCancerCheck on past-year fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and endoscopy in Ontario relative to the rest of Canada. Several verification tests validated the suitability of our model specification.

Results

The difference-in-differences analysis shows that ColonCancerCheck increased FOBT screening in the average risk population by 5.2 percentage points (95% CI [3.2, 7.2]), an increase of 33% relative to pre-program screening rates. The program had no observed effect on endoscopy screening and we found no evidence that ColonCancerCheck differentially altered the screening practices of population sub-groups.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest ColonCancerCheck has been successful at increasing use of FOBT in the asymptomatic average risk population.

Colorectal cancer screening with blood-based biomarkers: cost-effectiveness of methylated septin 9 DNA versus current strategies

BACKGROUND

Screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality, but many persons remain unscreened. Screening with a blood test could improve screening rates. We estimated the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with emerging biomarkers, illustrated by a methylated Septin 9 DNA plasma assay ((m)SEPT9), versus established strategies.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a validated decision analytic model comparing (m)SEPT9, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy, projecting lifetime benefits and costs.

RESULTS

In the base case, (m)SEPT9 decreased colorectal cancer incidence by 35% to 41% and colorectal cancer mortality by 53% to 61% at costs of $8,400 to $11,500/quality-adjusted life year gained versus no screening. All established screening strategies were more effective than (m)SEPT9. FIT was cost saving, dominated (m)SEPT9, and was preferred among all the alternatives. Screening uptake and longitudinal adherence rates over time strongly influenced the comparisons between strategies. At the population level, (m)SEPT9 yielded incremental benefit at acceptable costs when it increased the fraction of the population screened more than it was substituted for other strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

(m)SEPT9 seems to be effective and cost-effective compared with no screening. To be cost-effective compared with established strategies, (m)SEPT9 or blood-based biomarkers with similar test performance characteristics would need to achieve substantially higher uptake and adherence rates than the alternatives. It remains to be proven whether colorectal cancer screening with a blood test can improve screening uptake or long-term adherence compared with established strategies.

IMPACT

Our study offers insights into the potential role of colorectal cancer screening with blood-based biomarkers.

Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative strategies

OBJECTIVES

Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy are proven to decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Sigmoidoscopy's benefit is limited to the distal colon. Observational data are conflicting regarding the degree to which colonoscopy affords protection against proximal CRC. Our aim was to explore the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative CRC screening strategies in light of the latest published data.

METHODS

We performed a contemporary cost-utility analysis using a Markov model validated against data from randomized controlled trials of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy. Persons at average CRC risk within the general US population were modeled. Screening strategies included those recommended by the United States (US) Preventive Services Task Force, including colonoscopy every 10 years (COLO), flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years (FS), annual fecal occult blood testing, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and the combination FS/FIT. The main outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs.

RESULTS

In the base case, FIT dominated other strategies. The advantage of FIT over FS and COLO was contingent on rates of uptake and adherence that are well above current US rates. Compared with FIT, FS and COLO both cost <$50,000/QALY gained when FIT per-cycle adherence was <50%. COLO cost $56,800/QALY gained vs. FS in the base case. COLO cost <$100,000/QALY gained vs. FS when COLO yielded a relative risk of proximal CRC of <0.5 vs. no screening. In probabilistic analyses, COLO was cost-effective vs. FS at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY gained in 84% of iterations.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening colonoscopy may be cost-effective compared with FIT and sigmoidoscopy, depending on the relative rates of screening uptake and adherence and the protective benefit of colonoscopy in the proximal colon. Colonoscopy's cost-effectiveness compared with sigmoidoscopy is contingent on the ability to deliver ~50% protection against CRC in the proximal colon.

Evaluation of a VHA collaborative to improve follow-up after a positive colorectal cancer screening test

BACKGROUND

In 2005, the Veterans Health Administration initiated a yearlong Colorectal Cancer Care Collaborative (C4) to improve timely follow-up after positive fecal occult blood tests.

METHODS

Twenty-one facilities formed local quality improvement (QI) teams. Teams received QI training, created process flow maps, implemented process changes, and shared learning through 2 face-to-face meetings, conference calls, and a discussion board. We evaluated pre-post change in the timeliness of follow-up among C4 facilities and 3 control facilities. Outcome measures included the proportion of patients receiving a follow-up colonoscopy within 1 year, the proportion receiving 60-day follow-up (the focus of C4 teams), and average days to colonoscopy. Survey data from C4 team members was analyzed to identify predictors of facility-level improvement.

RESULTS

Both C4 and control facilities improved on 1-year follow-up (10% and 9% increases, respectively, both P's<0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in the proportion receiving 60-day follow-up among C4 facilities (27% pre-C4 vs. 39% post-C4, P=0.008) but a nonsignificant decrease among control facilities (45% pre-C4 vs. 29% post-C4, P=0.14). Average days to colonoscopy decreased significantly among C4 facilities (129 pre-C4 vs. 103 post-C4, P=0.004) but increased significantly among control facilities (81 pre-C4 vs. 103 post-C4, P=0.04). Teams with the most improvement established clear roles/goals, had previous QI training, made more use of QI tools, and incorporated primary care education into their improvement work.

CONCLUSIONS

A Veterans Health Administration improvement collaborative modestly decreased time to colonoscopy after a positive colorectal cancer screening test but significant room for improvement remains and benefits of participation were not realized by all facilities.

Improving the effectiveness of fecal occult blood testing in a primary care clinic by direct colonoscopy referral for positive tests

Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is recommended by national guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and has been shown to reduce both the incidence and mortality of CRC. FOBT screening is a complex process and little is known concerning the best methods for implementing FOBT screening in primary care clinics. The purpose of this study was to determine if direct gastroenterology (GI) service notification of all positive FOBT results in improved time for provider response and colonoscopy. The secondary aims were to determine to what extent implementation of FOBT screening was appropriate in a large primary care clinic and correlate this with findings from colonoscopy. Data were collected prospectively following implementation of a direct referral strategy and compared with two retrospective time periods during which the ordering practitioners were responsible for follow-up of all positive FOBT. Implementation of immediate GI referral of positive tests eliminated improper and neglected follow-up, and resulted in shorter delays in provider response time and colonoscopy completion. Inappropriate use of FOBT was observed in 49% of patients, indicating that further interventions in primary care clinics to improve the quality of FOBT screening are necessary.

Timely follow-up of positive fecal occult blood tests strategies associated with improvement

BACKGROUND

In light of previous research indicating that many patients fail to receive timely diagnostic follow-up of positive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) initiated a national CRC diagnosis quality-improvement (QI) effort.

PURPOSE

This article documents the percent of patients receiving follow-up within 60 days of a positive CRC screening fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and identifies improvement strategies that predict timely follow-up.

METHODS

In 2007, VA facilities completed a survey in which they indicated the degree to which they had implemented a series of improvement strategies and described barriers to improvement. Three types of strategies were assessed: developing QI infrastructure, improving care delivery processes, and building gastroenterology capacity. Survey data were merged with a measure of 60-day positive-FOBT follow-up. Facility-level predictors of timely follow-up were identified and relationships among categories of improvement strategies were assessed. Data were analyzed in 2008.

RESULTS

The median facility-reported 60-day follow-up rate for positive screening FOBTs was 24.5%. Several strategies were associated with timeliness of follow-up. The relationship between the implementation of QI infrastructure strategies and timely follow-up was mediated by the implementation of process-change strategies. Although constraints on gastroenterology capacity were often sited as a key barrier, implementation of strategies to address this issue was unassociated with timely follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Developing QI infrastructure appears to be an effective strategy for improving FOBT follow-up when this work is followed by process improvements. Increasing gastroenterology capacity may be more difficult than improving processes of care.