1
|
Coronado GD, Bienen L, Burnett-Hartman A, Lee JK, Rutter CM. Maximizing scarce colonoscopy resources: the crucial role of Stool-Based tests. J Natl Cancer Inst 2024:djae022. [PMID: 38310359 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djae022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2024] [Indexed: 02/05/2024] Open
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems, including federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), experienced disruptions in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. National organizations called for greater use of at-home stool-based testing followed by colonoscopy for those with abnormal test results to limit (in-person) colonoscopy exams to people with acute symptoms, or who were high-risk. This 'stool-test-first' strategy may also be useful for adults with low-risk adenomas who are due for surveillance colonoscopy. We argue that colonoscopy is overused both as a first-line screening method in low and average risk adults and as a surveillance tool among adults with small adenomas. Yet, simultaneously, many people do not receive much-needed colonoscopies. Delivering the right screening tests at intervals that reduce the risk of CRC, while minimizing patient inconvenience and procedural risks, can strengthen health care systems. Risk stratification could improve efficiency of CRC screening, but because models that adequately predict risk are years away from clinical use, we need to optimize use of currently available technology- that is, low-cost fecal testing followed by colonoscopy for those with abnormal test results. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgent need to adapt to resource constraints around colonoscopies and showed that increased use of stool-based testing was possible. Learning how to adapt to such constraints without sacrificing patients' health, particularly for patients who receive care at FQHCs, should be a priority for CRC prevention research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gloria D Coronado
- Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave, Portland, 97227, OR, USA
- University of Arizona Cancer Center, 1515 N. Campbell Ave, Tucson, 85724-5024, AZ, USA
| | - Leslie Bienen
- Independent Researcher, C3 Science, 4241 SE Liebe St, Portland, 97206, OR, USA
| | - Andrea Burnett-Hartman
- Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Institute for Health Research, 2550 S Parker Rd, Aurora, 80014, CO, USA
| | - Jeffrey K Lee
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, PO Box 12923, CA, USA, 94604-2923
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, 1700 Fairview Ave. N, Seattle, 98109, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rutter CM, Nascimento de Lima P, Maerzluft CE, May FP, Murphy CC. Black-White disparities in colorectal cancer outcomes: a simulation study of screening benefit. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2023; 2023:196-203. [PMID: 37947338 PMCID: PMC10637026 DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgad019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Revised: 06/14/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 11/12/2023] Open
Abstract
The US Black population has higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates and worse CRC survival than the US White population, as well as historically lower rates of CRC screening. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence rate data in people diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 45 years, before routine CRC screening is recommended, were analyzed to estimate temporal changes in CRC risk in Black and White populations. There was a rapid rise in rectal and distal colon cancer incidence in the White population but not the Black population, and little change in proximal colon cancer incidence for both groups. In 2014-2018, CRC incidence per 100 000 was 17.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.3 to 19.9) among Black individuals aged 40-44 years and 16.6 (95% CI = 15.6 to 17.6) among White individuals aged 40-44 years; 42.3% of CRCs diagnosed in Black patients were proximal colon cancer, and 41.1% of CRCs diagnosed in White patients were rectal cancer. Analyses used a race-specific microsimulation model to project screening benefits, based on life-years gained and lifetime reduction in CRC incidence, assuming these Black-White differences in CRC risk and location. The projected benefits of screening (via either colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing) were greater in the Black population, suggesting that observed Black-White differences in CRC incidence are not driven by differences in risk. Projected screening benefits were sensitive to survival assumptions made for Black populations. Building racial disparities in survival into the model reduced projected screening benefits, which can bias policy decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn M Rutter
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Division of Public Health Sciences, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Christopher E Maerzluft
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Division of Public Health Sciences, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Folasade P May
- Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- UCLA Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Equity, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Caitlin C Murphy
- University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van den Berg DMN, Nascimento de Lima P, Knudsen AB, Rutter CM, Weinberg D, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. NordICC Trial Results in Line With Expected Colorectal Cancer Mortality Reduction After Colonoscopy: A Modeling Study. Gastroenterology 2023; 165:1077-1079.e2. [PMID: 37454978 PMCID: PMC10962655 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.06.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2023] [Revised: 06/27/2023] [Accepted: 06/28/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Danica M N van den Berg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Biostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, Washington
| | - David Weinberg
- Department of Medicine, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nascimento de Lima P, van den Puttelaar R, Hahn AI, Harlass M, Collier N, Ozik J, Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM. Projected long-term effects of colorectal cancer screening disruptions following the COVID-19 pandemic. eLife 2023; 12:e85264. [PMID: 37129468 PMCID: PMC10154022 DOI: 10.7554/elife.85264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Accepted: 04/10/2023] [Indexed: 05/03/2023] Open
Abstract
The aftermath of the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic may contribute to the widening of disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes due to differential disruptions to CRC screening. This comparative microsimulation analysis uses two CISNET CRC models to simulate the impact of ongoing screening disruptions induced by the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term CRC outcomes. We evaluate three channels through which screening was disrupted: delays in screening, regimen switching, and screening discontinuation. The impact of these disruptions on long-term CRC outcomes was measured by the number of life-years lost due to CRC screening disruptions compared to a scenario without any disruptions. While short-term delays in screening of 3-18 months are predicted to result in minor life-years loss, discontinuing screening could result in much more significant reductions in the expected benefits of screening. These results demonstrate that unequal recovery of screening following the pandemic can widen disparities in CRC outcomes and emphasize the importance of ensuring equitable recovery to screening following the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Anne I Hahn
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUnited States
| | | | | | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUnited States
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O'Brien MJ, Mills GM, Allen JI, Feld AD, Jordan PA, Fleisher M, Orlow I, Meester RGS, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM, Knudsen AB, Mandelson M, Shaukat A, Mendelsohn RB, Hahn AI, Lobaugh SM, Palmer BS, Serrano V, Kumar JR, Fischer SE, Chen JC, Bayuga-Miller S, Kuk D, O'Connell K, Church TR. Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening-Colonoscopy Versus Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test. Gastroenterology 2023:S0016-5085(23)00505-X. [PMID: 36948424 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.03.206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/08/2023] [Indexed: 03/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines include screening-colonoscopy and sequential high sensitivity fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT), with expectation of similar effectiveness based on the assumption of similar high adherence. However, adherence to screening-colonoscopy compared to sequential HSgFOBT has not been reported. In this randomized clinical trial, we assessed adherence and pathology findings for a single screening-colonoscopy versus sequential and non-sequential HSgFOBT. METHODS Participants aged 40-69 were enrolled in three centers, which represented different clinical settings. Participants were randomized into a single screening-colonoscopy arm versus sequential HSgFOBT arm comprised of 4-7 rounds. Initial adherence to screening-colonoscopy and sequential adherence to HSgFOBT, follow-up colonoscopy for positive HSgFOBT tests, crossover to colonoscopy, and detection of advanced neoplasia or large serrated lesions (ADN-SER) were measured. RESULTS 3,523 participants were included in the trial with 1761 and 1762 participants randomized to the screening-colonoscopy and HSgFOBT arms, respectively. Adherence was 1473 (83.6%) for the screening-colonoscopy arm versus 1288 (73.1%) for the HSgFOBT arm after one round (RR=1.14, [95% CI 1.10-1.19] P ≤0.001), but only 674 (38.3%) over four sequential HSgFOBT rounds (RR=2.19, [95% CI 2.05-2.33]). Overall adherence to any screening increased to 1558 (88.5%) in the screening-colonoscopy arm during the entire study period and 1493 in the HSgFOBT arm (84.7%) (RR=1.04, [95% CI 1.02-1.07]). 436 (24.7%) participants crossed over to screening-colonoscopy over the first four rounds. ADN-SER were detected in 121 (8.2%) of the 1473 participants in the colonoscopy arm who were adherent to protocol in the first 12 months of the study, whereas the detection of ADN-SER among those who were not sequentially adherent (N=709) to HSgFOBT was subpar (0.6%) (RR=14.72, [95% CI 5.46-39.67]) when compared to those who were sequentially adherent (3.3%) (N=647) (RR=2.52, [95% CI 1.61-3.98]) to HSgFOBT in the first four rounds. When including colonoscopies from HSgFOBT patients who were never positive yet crossed over (N=1483), 5.5% of ADN-SER were detected (RR=1.50, [95% CI 1.15-1.96]) in the first four rounds. CONCLUSIONS Observed adherence to sequential rounds of HSgFOBT was suboptimal when compared to a single screening-colonoscopy. The detection of ADN-SER was inferior when non-sequential HSgFOBT adherence was compared to sequential adherence. However, the greatest number of ADN-SER was detected among those who crossed over to colonoscopy and opted to receive a colonoscopy. The effectiveness of a HSgFOBT screening program may be enhanced if crossover to screening-colonoscopy is permitted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
| | - Sidney J Winawer
- Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Michael J O'Brien
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Glenn M Mills
- Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA
| | - John I Allen
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Andrew D Feld
- Department of Gastroenterology, Kaiser-Permanente Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Paul A Jordan
- Department of Medicine, Louisiana State University Health, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Martin Fleisher
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Irene Orlow
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Biostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences Division, Seattle WA
| | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Aasma Shaukat
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health and Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York
| | - Robin B Mendelsohn
- Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anne I Hahn
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Stephanie M Lobaugh
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Julie R Kumar
- Novartis (Investigative Initiative Trials and Compassionate Use Studies), East Hanover, NJ
| | - Sara E Fischer
- Department of Government, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Jennifer C Chen
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sharon Bayuga-Miller
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Kelli O'Connell
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Timothy R Church
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health and Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
de Lima PN, Rutter CM, Maerzluft C, Ozik J, Collier N. Robustness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Colonoscopy Screening Strategies. medRxiv 2023:2023.03.07.23286939. [PMID: 36945378 PMCID: PMC10029022 DOI: 10.1101/2023.03.07.23286939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/23/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Despite significant overall declines in CRC incidence and mortality, there has been an alarming increase in CRC among people younger than 50. This study uses an established microsimulation model, CRC-SPIN, to perform a 'stress test' of colonoscopy screening strategies. First, we expand CRC-SPIN to include birth-cohort effects. Second, we estimate natural history model parameters via Incremental Mixture Approximate Bayesian Computation (IMABC) for two model versions to characterize uncertainty while accounting for increased early CRC onset. Third, we simulate 26 colonoscopy screening strategies across the posterior distribution of estimated model parameters, assuming four different colonoscopy sensitivities (104 total scenarios). We find that model projections of screening benefit are highly dependent on natural history and test sensitivity assumptions, but in this stress test, the policy recommendations are robust to the uncertainties considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Engineering and Applied Sciences Department, RAND Corporation
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutch
- Decision and Infrastructure Sciences, Argonne National Laboratory
| | | | - Jonathan Ozik
- Engineering and Applied Sciences Department, RAND Corporation
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutch
- Decision and Infrastructure Sciences, Argonne National Laboratory
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
DeYoreo M, Rutter CM, Lee SD. Use of 2-Stage Modeling to Identify How Colorectal Cancer Risk Changes With Period and Cohort. Am J Epidemiol 2023; 192:230-236. [PMID: 36222654 PMCID: PMC10308506 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwac177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2021] [Revised: 08/13/2022] [Accepted: 10/07/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates have decreased among adults aged 50 years or older while increasing in adults under age 50 years. Understanding these trends is challenging because of the multiple related time scales of age, diagnosis period, and birth cohort. We analyzed incidence rates of rectal, distal colon, and proximal colon cancer for individuals aged 20 years or more from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program for diagnosis years 1978-2017. We used a 2-stage generalized linear model to determine age, period, and cohort effects for CRC incidence. We first estimated birth cohort effects among people under age 45 years. We used these results to specify prior distributions for cohort effects in a Bayesian model to estimate period effects among people aged 45 years or more. There was no evidence of period effects for people under age 45 years. Risks of rectal and distal colon cancer increased for later birth cohorts. Compared with the 1943-1952 birth cohort, the 1983-1992 birth cohort had 2.2 times the risk of rectal cancer, 1.9 times the risk of distal colon cancer, and 1.3 times the risk of proximal colon cancer. For people aged ≥45 years, period effects showed declines in CRC risk that were attributable to screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria DeYoreo
- Correspondence to Dr. Maria DeYoreo, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 (e-mail: )
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
van den Puttelaar R, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Hahn AI, Rutter CM, Levin TR, Zauber AG, Meester RGS. Impact and Recovery from COVID-19-Related Disruptions in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Care in the US: A Scenario Analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023; 32:22-29. [PMID: 36215205 PMCID: PMC9827109 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-22-0544] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2022] [Revised: 08/03/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many colorectal cancer-related procedures were suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we predict the impact of resulting delays in screening (colonoscopy, FIT, and sigmoidoscopy) and diagnosis on colorectal cancer-related outcomes, and compare different recovery scenarios. METHODS Using the MISCAN-Colon model, we simulated the US population and evaluated different impact and recovery scenarios. Scenarios were defined by the duration and severity of the disruption (percentage of eligible adults affected), the length of delays, and the duration of the recovery. During recovery (6, 12 or 24 months), capacity was increased to catch up missed procedures. Primary outcomes were excess colorectal cancer cases and -related deaths, and additional colonoscopies required during recovery. RESULTS With a 24-month recovery, the model predicted that the US population would develop 7,210 (0.18%) excess colorectal cancer cases during 2020-2040, and 6,950 (0.65%) excess colorectal cancer-related deaths, and require 108,500 (8.6%) additional colonoscopies per recovery month, compared with a no-disruption scenario. Shorter recovery periods of 6 and 12 months, respectively, decreased excess colorectal cancer-related deaths to 4,190 (0.39%) and 4,580 (0.43%), at the expense of 260,200-590,100 (20.7%-47.0%) additional colonoscopies per month. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic will likely cause more than 4,000 excess colorectal cancer-related deaths in the US, which could increase to more than 7,000 if recovery periods are longer. IMPACT Our results highlight that catching-up colorectal cancer-related services within 12 months provides a good balance between required resources and mitigation of the impact of the disruption on colorectal cancer-related deaths.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anne I Hahn
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Theodore R Levin
- Department of Gastroenterology, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Walnut Creek, California
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Reinier G S Meester
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
de Lima PN, van den Puttelaar R, Hahn AI, Harlass M, Collier N, Ozik J, Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM. Unequal Recovery in Colorectal Cancer Screening Following the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparative Microsimulation Analysis. medRxiv 2022:2022.12.23.22283887. [PMID: 36597528 PMCID: PMC9810216 DOI: 10.1101/2022.12.23.22283887] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
The aftermath of the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic may contribute to the widening of disparities in access to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening due to differential disruptions to CRC screening. This comparative microsimulation analysis uses two CISNET CRC models to simulate the impact of ongoing screening disruptions induced by the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term CRC outcomes. We evaluate three channels through which screening was disrupted: delays in screening, regimen switching, and screening discontinuation. The impact of these disruptions on long-term colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes was measured by the number of Life-years lost due to CRC screening disruptions compared to a scenario without any disruptions. While short-term delays in screening of 3-18 months are predicted to result in minor life-years loss, discontinuing screening could result in much more significant reductions in the expected benefits of screening. These results demonstrate that unequal recovery of screening following the pandemic can widen disparities in colorectal cancer outcomes and emphasize the importance of ensuring equitable recovery to screening following the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Rosita van den Puttelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Anne I. Hahn
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Matthias Harlass
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Nicholson Collier
- Decision and Infrastructure Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois, USA
| | - Jonathan Ozik
- Decision and Infrastructure Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois, USA
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Carolyn M. Rutter
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hepner KA, Bloom EL, Newberry S, Sousa JL, Osilla KC, Booth M, Bialas A, Rutter CM. The Impact of Mindfulness Meditation Programs on Performance-Related Outcomes: Implications for the U.S. Army. Rand Health Q 2022; 10:9. [PMID: 36484076 PMCID: PMC9718060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Although studies have suggested that mindfulness-based interventions might be effective in enhancing military readiness and resilience, this has not been rigorously evaluated. This study presents results from a systematic review and meta-analyses of research examining how mindfulness meditation affects 13 performance-related outcomes of interest to the U.S. Army and broader military. The authors supplemented the systematic review by examining how mindfulness meditation could support stress management and exploring characteristics of selected mindfulness programs. The goal was to develop recommendations for mindfulness meditation programs for soldiers, should the Army choose to implement such programs in the future. Findings suggest that mindfulness may improve some aspects of attention and emotion regulation, impulsivity, and work-related morale and social support. The available evidence does not suggest that mindfulness improves other outcomes of interest to the Army. Notably, mindfulness meditation programs reduce stress and may reduce parental stress, which could benefit Army families. Yet more research is needed to identify best practices for implementing mindfulness programs in the military. The authors recommend conducting high-quality evaluations of mindfulness meditation with soldiers and assessing the effect of mindfulness meditation on military families.
Collapse
|
11
|
de Lima PN, Vardavas R, Baker L, Ringel JS, Lempert RJ, Rutter CM, Ozik J. Reopening Under Uncertainty: Stress-Testing California's COVID-19 Exit Strategy. Rand Health Q 2022; 9:24. [PMID: 35837515 PMCID: PMC9242558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic required significant public health interventions from local governments. Early in the pandemic, RAND researchers developed a decision support tool to provide policymakers with insight into the trade-offs they might face when choosing among nonpharmaceutical intervention levels. Using an updated version of the model, the researchers performed a stress-test of a variety of alternative reopening plans, using California as an example. This article presents the general lessons learned from these experiments and discusses four characteristics of the best reopening strategies.
Collapse
|
12
|
Coronado GD, Dickerson JF, Burnett-Hartman AN, Carethers JM, Lee JK, McBurnie MA, Petrik A, Keast E, Hendren S, McMullen C, Mummadi R, Murphy CC, Rutter CM. Reduced Implementation and Completion of Average-Risk Annual Fecal Immunochemical Test Colorectal Cancer Screening in Black Patients Aged 45-49 Years. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022:S1542-3565(22)00519-5. [PMID: 35644342 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.05.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Revised: 04/28/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - John M Carethers
- University of Michigan Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Jeff K Lee
- Kaiser Permanente Division of Research, Oakland, California
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Rutter CM, May FP, Coronado GD, Pujol TA, Thomas EG, Cabreros I. Racism Is a Modifiable Risk Factor: Relationships Among Race, Ethnicity, and Colorectal Cancer Outcomes. Gastroenterology 2022; 162:1053-1055. [PMID: 34942173 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.12.251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2021] [Revised: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Folasade P May
- David Geffen School of Medicine and UCLA Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Equity, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
DeYoreo M, Rutter CM, Ozik J, Collier N. Sequentially calibrating a Bayesian microsimulation model to incorporate new information and assumptions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022; 22:12. [PMID: 35022005 PMCID: PMC8756687 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01726-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2021] [Accepted: 12/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microsimulation models are mathematical models that simulate event histories for individual members of a population. They are useful for policy decisions because they simulate a large number of individuals from an idealized population, with features that change over time, and the resulting event histories can be summarized to describe key population-level outcomes. Model calibration is the process of incorporating evidence into the model. Calibrated models can be used to make predictions about population trends in disease outcomes and effectiveness of interventions, but calibration can be challenging and computationally expensive. METHODS This paper develops a technique for sequentially updating models to take full advantage of earlier calibration results, to ultimately speed up the calibration process. A Bayesian approach to calibration is used because it combines different sources of evidence and enables uncertainty quantification which is appealing for decision-making. We develop this method in order to re-calibrate a microsimulation model for the natural history of colorectal cancer to include new targets that better inform the time from initiation of preclinical cancer to presentation with clinical cancer (sojourn time), because model exploration and validation revealed that more information was needed on sojourn time, and that the predicted percentage of patients with cancers detected via colonoscopy screening was too low. RESULTS The sequential approach to calibration was more efficient than recalibrating the model from scratch. Incorporating new information on the percentage of patients with cancers detected upon screening changed the estimated sojourn time parameters significantly, increasing the estimated mean sojourn time for cancers in the colon and rectum, providing results with more validity. CONCLUSIONS A sequential approach to recalibration can be used to efficiently recalibrate a microsimulation model when new information becomes available that requires the original targets to be supplemented with additional targets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria DeYoreo
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
| | | | - Jonathan Ozik
- Argonne National Laboratory, Building 221, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL, 60439, USA
| | - Nicholson Collier
- Argonne National Laboratory, Building 221, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL, 60439, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dementia is a common disease that has an impact on both the affected individual and family members who provide caregiving. Simulation models can assist in setting policy that anticipates public health needs by predicting the demand for and availability of care. OBJECTIVE We developed a relatively simple method for simulating the onset of dementia that can be used in combination with an existing microsimulation model. METHODS We started with Socsim, a demographic microsimulation model that simulates a population with family kinship networks. We simulated dementia in the Socsim population by simulating the number of individuals diagnosed with dementia in their lifetime and the ages of onset and death from dementia for each of these dementia cases. We then matched dementia cases to the simulated population based on age at death, so for each individual, we simulate whether they develop dementia and, if so, their age at onset. This approach simulates dementia onset but does not alter the demographic model's simulated age of death. RESULTS We selected model dementia parameters so that the combined Socsim-Dementia model reproduces published dementia prevalence rates and survival times after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS Adding simulation of dementia to a kinship network model enables prediction of the availability of family caregivers for people with dementia under a range of different assumptions about future fertility, mortality, and dementia risk. We demonstrated how to add simulation of dementia onset and death to an existing microsimulation model to obtain a method for predicting dementia prevalence in the context of another more detailed model. The approach we developed can be generalized to simulate other progressive health conditions that affect mortality.
Collapse
|
16
|
Rutter CM, Nascimento de Lima P, Lee JK, Ozik J. Too Good to Be True? Evaluation of Colonoscopy Sensitivity Assumptions Used in Policy Models. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2021; 31:775-782. [PMID: 34906968 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-21-1001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2021] [Revised: 10/13/2021] [Accepted: 11/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Models can help guide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening policy. While models are carefully calibrated and validated, there is less scrutiny of assumptions about test performance. METHODS We examined the validity of the CRC-SPIN model and colonoscopy sensitivity assumptions. Standard sensitivity assumptions, consistent with published decision analyses, assume sensitivity equal to 0.75 for diminutive adenomas (<6mm), 0.85 for small adenomas (6-10mm), 0.95 for large adenomas ( {greater than or equal to} 10mm), and 0.95 for preclinical cancer. We also selected adenoma sensitivity that resulted in more accurate predictions. Targets were drawn from the Wheat Bran Fiber study. We examined how well the model predicted outcomes measured over a three-year follow-up period, including: the number of adenomas detected, the size of the largest adenoma detected, and incident CRC. RESULTS Using standard sensitivity assumptions, the model predicted adenoma prevalence that was too low (42.5% versus 48.9% observed, with 95% confidence interval 45.3%-50.7%) and detection of too few large adenomas (5.1% versus 14.% observed, with 95% confidence interval 11.8%-17.4%). Predictions were close to targets when we set sensitivities to 0.20 for diminutive adenomas, 0.60 for small adenomas, 0.80 for 10-20mm adenomas, and 0.98 for adenomas 20mm and larger. CONCLUSIONS Colonoscopy may be less accurate than currently assumed, especially for diminutive adenomas. Alternatively, the CRC-SPIN model may not accurately simulate onset and progression of adenomas in higher-risk populations. IMPACT Misspecification of either colonoscopy sensitivity or disease progression in high-risk populations may impact the predicted effectiveness of CRC screening. When possible, decision analyses used to inform policy should address these uncertainties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jeffrey K Lee
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California
| | - Jonathan Ozik
- Decision and Infrastructure Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rutter CM, Inadomi JM, Maerzluft CE. The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study. J Med Screen 2021; 29:92-98. [PMID: 34894841 DOI: 10.1177/09691413211045103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays. METHOD The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit. RESULTS The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. CONCLUSIONS Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn M Rutter
- Economics, Sociology & Statistics, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA
| | - John M Inadomi
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, 12348University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Nascimento de Lima P, Lempert R, Vardavas R, Baker L, Ringel J, Rutter CM, Ozik J, Collier N. Reopening California: Seeking robust, non-dominated COVID-19 exit strategies. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0259166. [PMID: 34699570 PMCID: PMC8547648 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic required significant public health interventions from local governments. Although nonpharmaceutical interventions often were implemented as decision rules, few studies evaluated the robustness of those reopening plans under a wide range of uncertainties. This paper uses the Robust Decision Making approach to stress-test 78 alternative reopening strategies, using California as an example. This study uniquely considers a wide range of uncertainties and demonstrates that seemingly sensible reopening plans can lead to both unnecessary COVID-19 deaths and days of interventions. We find that plans using fixed COVID-19 case thresholds might be less effective than strategies with time-varying reopening thresholds. While we use California as an example, our results are particularly relevant for jurisdictions where vaccination roll-out has been slower. The approach used in this paper could also prove useful for other public health policy problems in which policymakers need to make robust decisions in the face of deep uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pedro Nascimento de Lima
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States of America
| | - Robert Lempert
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
| | - Raffaele Vardavas
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
| | - Lawrence Baker
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
| | - Jeanne Ringel
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
| | - Carolyn M. Rutter
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA, United States of America
| | - Jonathan Ozik
- Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States of America
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Affiliation(s)
- Amy B Knudsen
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Knudsen AB, Rutter CM, Peterse EFP, Lietz AP, Seguin CL, Meester RGS, Perdue LA, Lin JS, Siegel RL, Doria-Rose VP, Feuer EJ, Zauber AG, Kuntz KM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Updated Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2021; 325:1998-2011. [PMID: 34003219 PMCID: PMC8409520 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.5746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 135] [Impact Index Per Article: 45.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Objective To provide updated model-based estimates of the benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies and to identify strategies that may provide an efficient balance of life-years gained (LYG) from screening and colonoscopy burden to inform the USPSTF. Design, Setting, and Participants Comparative modeling study using 3 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer screening in a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old US individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer. Exposures Screening from ages 45, 50, or 55 years to ages 70, 75, 80, or 85 years with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography colonography, or colonoscopy. All persons with an abnormal noncolonoscopy screening test result were assumed to undergo follow-up colonoscopy. Screening intervals varied by test. Full adherence with all procedures was assumed. Main Outcome and Measures Estimated LYG relative to no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies (burden), number of complications from screening (harms), and balance of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios). Efficient strategies were those estimated to require fewer additional colonoscopies per additional LYG relative to other strategies. Results Estimated LYG from screening strategies ranged from 171 to 381 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden ranged from 624 to 6817 per 1000 individuals, and screening complications ranged from 5 to 22 per 1000 individuals. Among the 49 strategies that were efficient options with all 3 models, 41 specified screening beginning at age 45. No single age to end screening was predominant among the efficient strategies, although the additional LYG from continuing screening after age 75 were generally small. With the exception of a 5-year interval for computed tomography colonography, no screening interval predominated among the efficient strategies for each modality. Among the strategies highlighted in the 2016 USPSTF recommendation, lowering the age to begin screening from 50 to 45 years was estimated to result in 22 to 27 additional LYG, 161 to 784 additional colonoscopies, and 0.1 to 2 additional complications per 1000 persons (ranges are across screening strategies, based on mean estimates across models). Assuming full adherence, screening outcomes and efficient strategies were similar by sex and race and across 3 scenarios for population risk of colorectal cancer. Conclusions and Relevance This microsimulation modeling analysis suggests that screening for colorectal cancer with stool tests, endoscopic tests, or computed tomography colonography starting at age 45 years provides an efficient balance of colonoscopy burden and life-years gained.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy B. Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | - Anna P. Lietz
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Claudia L. Seguin
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Leslie A. Perdue
- Kaiser Permanente Evidence-based Practice Center and Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Jennifer S. Lin
- Kaiser Permanente Evidence-based Practice Center and Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | | | - V. Paul Doria-Rose
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Eric J. Feuer
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Karen M. Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
Calibration of a microsimulation model (MSM) is a challenging but crucial step for the development of a valid model. Numerous calibration methods for MSMs have been suggested in the literature, most of which are usually adjusted to the specific needs of the model and based on subjective criteria for the selection of optimal parameter values. This article compares 2 general approaches for calibrating MSMs used in medical decision making, a Bayesian and an empirical approach. We use as a tool the MIcrosimulation Lung Cancer (MILC) model, a streamlined, continuous-time, dynamic MSM that describes the natural history of lung cancer and predicts individual trajectories accounting for age, sex, and smoking habits. We apply both methods to calibrate MILC to observed lung cancer incidence rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. We compare the results from the 2 methods in terms of the resulting parameter distributions, model predictions, and efficiency. Although the empirical method proves more practical, producing similar results with smaller computational effort, the Bayesian method resulted in a calibrated model that produced more accurate outputs for rare events and is based on a well-defined theoretical framework for the evaluation and interpretation of the calibration outcomes. A combination of the 2 approaches is an alternative worth considering for calibrating complex predictive models, such as microsimulation models.
Collapse
|
22
|
de Lima PN, Lempert R, Vardavas R, Baker L, Ringel J, Rutter CM, Ozik J, Collier N. Reopening California : Seeking Robust, Non-Dominated COVID-19 Exit Strategies. medRxiv 2021. [PMID: 33948599 DOI: 10.1101/2021.04.26.21256105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
Amid global scarcity of COVID-19 vaccines and the threat of new variant strains, California and other jurisdictions face the question of when and how to implement and relax COVID-19 Nonpharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs). While policymakers have attempted to balance the health and economic impacts of the pandemic, decentralized decision-making, deep uncertainty, and the lack of widespread use of comprehensive decision support methods can lead to the choice of fragile or inefficient strategies. This paper uses simulation models and the Robust Decision Making (RDM) approach to stress-test California's reopening strategy and other alternatives over a wide range of futures. We find that plans which respond aggressively to initial outbreaks are required to robustly control the pandemic. Further, the best plans adapt to changing circumstances, lowering their stringent requirements to reopen over time or as more constituents are vaccinated. While we use California as an example, our results are particularly relevant for jurisdictions where vaccination roll-out has been slower.
Collapse
|
23
|
Murad MH, Fiordalisi C, Pillay J, Wilt TJ, O'Connor E, Kahwati L, Hernandez AV, Rutter CM, Chou R, Balk EM, Steele DW, Saldanha IJ, Panagiotou OA, Chang S, Gerrity M. Making Narrative Statements to Describe Treatment Effects. J Gen Intern Med 2021; 36:196-199. [PMID: 33111244 PMCID: PMC7858734 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-06330-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/16/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Accurately describing treatment effects using plain language and narrative statements is a critical step in communicating research findings to end users. However, the process of developing these narratives has not been historically guided by a specific framework. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center Program developed guidance for narrative summaries of treatment effects that identifies five constructs. We explicitly identify these constructs to facilitate developing narrative statements: (1) direction of effect, (2) size of effect, (3) clinical importance, (4) statistical significance, and (5) strength or certainty of evidence. These constructs clearly overlap. It may not always be feasible to address all five constructs. Based on context and intended audience, investigators can determine which constructs will be most important to address in narrative statements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Hassan Murad
- Mayo Clinic Evidence-based Practice Center, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
| | - Celia Fiordalisi
- Scientific Resource Center for the AHRQ Evidence-based Practice Center Program, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Jennifer Pillay
- University of Alberta Evidence-based Practice Center, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Timothy J Wilt
- Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Elizabeth O'Connor
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Leila Kahwati
- RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Adrian V Hernandez
- University of Connecticut Evidence-based Practice Center, Storrs, CT, USA
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Southern California/RAND Corporation Evidence-based Practice Center, Santa Monica, CA, USA
| | - Roger Chou
- Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Ethan M Balk
- Brown University Evidence-based Practice Center, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Dale W Steele
- Brown University Evidence-based Practice Center, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Ian J Saldanha
- Brown University Evidence-based Practice Center, Providence, RI, USA
| | | | - Stephanie Chang
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center Program, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Martha Gerrity
- Scientific Resource Center for the AHRQ Evidence-based Practice Center Program, Portland, OR, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Rutter CM, Knudsen AB, Lin JS, Bouskill KE. Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020; 30:3-12. [PMID: 33144285 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-19-1537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2019] [Revised: 05/06/2020] [Accepted: 10/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Racial disparities in colorectal cancer incidence are widely documented. There are two potential mechanisms for these disparities: differences in access to screening, including screening follow-up, and differences in underlying risk of colorectal cancer. We reviewed the literature for evidence of these two mechanisms. We show that higher colorectal cancer incidence in blacks relative to whites emerged only after the dissemination of screening and describe evidence of racial disparities in screening rates. In contrast to the strong evidence for differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization, there is limited evidence for racial differences in adenoma prevalence. In general, black and white patients who are screened have similar adenoma prevalence, though there is some evidence that advanced adenomas and adenomas in the proximal colon are somewhat more likely in black than white patients. We conclude that higher rates of colorectal cancer incidence among black patients are primarily driven by lower rates of colorectal cancer screening. Our findings highlight the need to increase black patients' access to quality screening to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer S Lin
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
DeYoreo M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Kuntz KM, Zauber AG, Rutter CM. Validation of Colorectal Cancer Models on Long-term Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial. Med Decis Making 2020; 40:1034-1040. [PMID: 33078673 PMCID: PMC7665984 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x20961095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Microsimulation models are often used to predict long-term outcomes and guide policy decisions regarding cancer screening. The United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening (UKFSS) Trial examines a one-time intervention of flexible sigmoidoscopy that was implemented before a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was established. Long-term study outcomes, now a full 17 y following randomization, have been published. We use the outcomes from this trial to validate 3 microsimulation models for CRC to long-term study outcomes. We find that 2 of 3 models accurately predict the relative effect of screening (the hazard ratios) on CRC-specific incidence 17 y after screening. We find that all 3 models yield predictions of the relative effect of screening on CRC incidence and mortality (i.e., the hazard ratios) that are reasonably close to the UKFSS results. Two of the 3 models accurately predict the relative reduction in CRC incidence 17 y after screening. One model accurately predicted the absolute incidence and mortality rates in the screened group. The models differ in their estimates related to adenoma detection at screening. Although high-quality screening results help to inform models, trials are expensive, last many years, and can be complicated by ethical issues and technological changes across the duration of the trial. Thus, well-calibrated and validated models are necessary to predict outcomes for which data are not available. The results from this validation demonstrate the utility of models in predicting long-term outcomes and in collaborative modeling to account for uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment and Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Karen M Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Barlow WE, Beaber EF, Geller BM, Kamineni A, Zheng Y, Haas JS, Chao CR, Rutter CM, Zauber AG, Sprague BL, Halm EA, Weaver DL, Chubak J, Doria-Rose VP, Kobrin S, Onega T, Quinn VP, Schapira MM, Tosteson ANA, Corley DA, Skinner CS, Schnall MD, Armstrong K, Wheeler CM, Silverberg MJ, Balasubramanian BA, Doubeni CA, McLerran D, Tiro JA. Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:238-246. [PMID: 31292633 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2018] [Revised: 04/11/2019] [Accepted: 07/03/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer screening is a complex process encompassing risk assessment, the initial screening examination, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment of cancer precursors or early cancers. Metrics that enable comparisons across different screening targets are needed. We present population-based screening metrics for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers for nine sites participating in the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium. METHODS We describe how selected metrics map to a trans-organ conceptual model of the screening process. For each cancer type, we calculated calendar year 2013 metrics for the screen-eligible target population (breast: ages 40-74 years; cervical: ages 21-64 years; colorectal: ages 50-75 years). Metrics for screening participation, timely diagnostic evaluation, and diagnosed cancers in the screened and total populations are presented for the total eligible population and stratified by age group and cancer type. RESULTS The overall screening-eligible populations in 2013 were 305 568 participants for breast, 3 160 128 for cervical, and 2 363 922 for colorectal cancer screening. Being up-to-date for testing was common for all three cancer types: breast (63.5%), cervical (84.6%), and colorectal (77.5%). The percentage of abnormal screens ranged from 10.7% for breast, 4.4% for cervical, and 4.5% for colorectal cancer screening. Abnormal breast screens were followed up diagnostically in almost all (96.8%) cases, and cervical and colorectal were similar (76.2% and 76.3%, respectively). Cancer rates per 1000 screens were 5.66, 0.17, and 1.46 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Comprehensive assessment of metrics by the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium enabled systematic identification of screening process steps in need of improvement. We encourage widespread use of common metrics to allow interventions to be tested across cancer types and health-care settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Elisabeth F Beaber
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Berta M Geller
- Departments of Family Medicine, and the University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Dana Farber, Harvard Cancer Institute, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
| | - Chun R Chao
- Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA
| | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Brian L Sprague
- Departments of Surgery and Radiology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Ethan A Halm
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.,Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Donald L Weaver
- Department of Pathology and the UVM Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT
| | - Jessica Chubak
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA
| | - V Paul Doria-Rose
- Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA.,Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Sarah Kobrin
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Tracy Onega
- Departments of Biomedical Data Science, Epidemiology, and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH
| | | | - Marilyn M Schapira
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, and CMC VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Anna N A Tosteson
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH
| | - Douglas A Corley
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA
| | - Celette Sugg Skinner
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Mitchell D Schnall
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Katrina Armstrong
- General Medicine Division, MA General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Cosette M Wheeler
- Departments of Pathology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico Health Science Center, Albuquerque, NM.,University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, NM
| | | | - Bijal A Balasubramanian
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,UTHealth School of Public Health, Dallas, TX
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Dale McLerran
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Jasmin A Tiro
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX.,Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Trail T, Friedman E, Rutter CM, Tanielian T. The Relationship Between Engagement in Online Support Groups and Social Isolation Among Military Caregivers: Longitudinal Questionnaire Study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22:e16423. [PMID: 32324141 PMCID: PMC7206524 DOI: 10.2196/16423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2019] [Revised: 01/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a lack of research on the effectiveness of online peer support groups for reducing social isolation and depressive symptoms among caregivers, and previous research has mixed results. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to test whether military caregivers who joined a new online peer support community or engaged with an existing online community experienced decreased perceived social isolation and improved depressive symptoms over 6 months. METHODS We conducted a longitudinal study of 212 military caregivers who had newly joined an online community and those who were members of other military caregiver groups. Multiple indicators of perceived social isolation and depressive symptoms were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months. RESULTS Compared with caregivers in the comparison group, caregivers who joined the new group experienced less perceived social isolation at 3 months (eg, number of caregivers in social network [unstandardized regression coefficients] b=0.49, SE 0.19, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.02), but this effect did not persist at 6 months. Those who engaged more with new or existing groups experienced less perceived social isolation over time (eg, number of caregivers in social network b=0.18, SE 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.27), and this relationship was mediated by increased interactions with other military caregivers (95% CI 0.0046 to 0.0961). Engagement with an online group was not associated with improvements in depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS Online communities might help reduce social isolation when members engage with the group, but more intensive treatment is needed to improve depressive symptoms.
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
Microsimulation models (MSMs) are used to inform policy by predicting population-level outcomes under different scenarios. MSMs simulate individual-level event histories that mark the disease process (such as the development of cancer) and the effect of policy actions (such as screening) on these events. MSMs often have many unknown parameters; calibration is the process of searching the parameter space to select parameters that result in accurate MSM prediction of a wide range of targets. We develop Incremental Mixture Approximate Bayesian Computation (IMABC) for MSM calibration, which results in a simulated sample from the posterior distribution of model parameters given calibration targets. IMABC begins with a rejection-based ABC step, drawing a sample of points from the prior distribution of model parameters and accepting points that result in simulated targets that are near observed targets. Next, the sample is iteratively updated by drawing additional points from a mixture of multivariate normal distributions and accepting points that result in accurate predictions. Posterior estimates are obtained by weighting the final set of accepted points to account for the adaptive sampling scheme. We demonstrate IMABC by calibrating CRC-SPIN 2.0, an updated version of a MSM for colorectal cancer (CRC) that has been used to inform national CRC screening guidelines.
Collapse
|
29
|
Naber SK, Knudsen AB, Zauber AG, Rutter CM, Fischer SE, Pabiniak CJ, Soto B, Kuntz KM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Cost-effectiveness of a multitarget stool DNA test for colorectal cancer screening of Medicare beneficiaries. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0220234. [PMID: 31483796 PMCID: PMC6726189 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220234] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2018] [Accepted: 07/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began covering a multitarget stool DNA (mtSDNA) test for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of Medicare beneficiaries. In this study, we evaluated whether mtSDNA testing is a cost-effective alternative to other CRC screening strategies reimbursed by CMS, and if not, under what conditions it could be. METHODS We use three independently-developed microsimulation models to simulate a cohort of previously unscreened US 65-year-olds who are screened with triennial mtSDNA testing, or one of six other reimbursed screening strategies. Main outcome measures are discounted life-years gained (LYG) and lifetime costs (CMS perspective), threshold reimbursement rates, and threshold adherence rates. Outcomes are expressed as the median and range across models. RESULTS Compared to no screening, triennial mtSDNA screening resulted in 82 (range: 79-88) LYG per 1,000 simulated individuals. This was more than for five-yearly sigmoidoscopy (80 (range: 71-89) LYG), but fewer than for every other simulated strategy. At its 2017 reimbursement rate of $512, mtSDNA was the most costly strategy, and even if adherence were 30% higher than with other strategies, it would not be a cost-effective alternative. At a substantially reduced reimbursement rate ($6-18), two models found that triennial mtSDNA testing was an efficient and potentially cost-effective screening option. CONCLUSIONS Compared to no screening, triennial mtSDNA screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality at acceptable costs. However, compared to nearly all other CRC screening strategies reimbursed by CMS it is less effective and considerably more costly, making it an inefficient screening option.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steffie K. Naber
- Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Amy B. Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America
| | - Carolyn M. Rutter
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
| | - Sara E. Fischer
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America
| | - Chester J. Pabiniak
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America
| | - Brittany Soto
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America
| | - Karen M. Kuntz
- Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Burnett-Hartman AN, Kamineni A, Corley DA, Singal AG, Halm EA, Rutter CM, Chubak J, Lee JK, Doubeni CA, Inadomi JM, Doria-Rose VP, Zheng Y. Colonoscopy Indication Algorithm Performance Across Diverse Health Care Systems in the PROSPR Consortium. EGEMS (Wash DC) 2019; 7:37. [PMID: 31531383 PMCID: PMC6676916 DOI: 10.5334/egems.296] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2018] [Accepted: 06/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the importance of characterizing colonoscopy indication for quality monitoring and cancer screening program evaluation, there is no standard approach to documenting colonoscopy indication in medical records. METHODS We applied two algorithms in three health care systems to assign colonoscopy indication to persons 50-89 years old who received a colonoscopy during 2010-2013. Both algorithms used standard procedure, diagnostic, and laboratory codes. One algorithm, the KPNC algorithm, used a hierarchical approach to classify exam indication into: diagnostic, surveillance, or screening; whereas the other, the SEARCH algorithm, used a logistic regression-based algorithm to provide the probability that colonoscopy was performed for screening. Gold standard assessment of indication was from medical records abstraction. RESULTS There were 1,796 colonoscopy exams included in analyses; age and racial/ethnic distributions of participants differed across health care systems. The KPNC algorithm's sensitivities and specificities for screening indication ranged from 0.78-0.82 and 0.78-0.91, respectively; sensitivities and specificities for diagnostic indication ranged from 0.78-0.89 and 0.74-0.82, respectively. The KPNC algorithm had poor sensitivities (ranging from 0.11-0.67) and high specificities for surveillance exams. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the SEARCH algorithm for screening indication ranged from 0.76-0.84 across health care systems. For screening indication, the KPNC algorithm obtained higher specificities than the SEARCH algorithm at the same sensitivity. CONCLUSION Despite standardized implementation of these indication algorithms across three health care systems, the capture of colonoscopy indication data was imperfect. Thus, we recommend that standard, systematic documentation of colonoscopy indication should be added to medical records to ensure efficient and accurate data capture.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea N. Burnett-Hartman
- Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, US
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, US
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, US
| | - Douglas A. Corley
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, US
| | - Amit G. Singal
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, US
| | - Ethan A. Halm
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, US
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, US
| | | | - Jessica Chubak
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, US
| | - Jeffrey K. Lee
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, US
| | - Chyke A. Doubeni
- Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Rochester, MN, US
- Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, US
| | - John M. Inadomi
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington, School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, US
| | - V. Paul Doria-Rose
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland, US
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, US
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pragmatic clinical trials often use automated data sources such as electronic health records, claims, or registries to identify eligible individuals and collect outcome information. A specific advantage that this automated data collection often yields is having data on potential participants when design decisions are being made. We outline how this data can be used to inform trial design. METHODS Our work is motivated by a pragmatic clinical trial evaluating the impact of suicide-prevention outreach interventions on fatal and non-fatal suicide attempts in the 18 months after randomization. We illustrate our recommended approaches for designing pragmatic clinical trials using historical data from the health systems participating in this study. Specifically, we illustrate how electronic health record data can be used to inform the selection of trial eligibility requirements, to estimate the distribution of participant characteristics over the course of the trial, and to conduct power and sample size calculations. RESULTS Data from 122,873 people with patient health questionnaire (PHQ) responses, recorded in their electronic health records between 1 July 2010 and 31 March 2012, were used to show that the suicide attempt rate in the 18 months following completion of the questionnaire varies by response to item nine of the PHQ. We estimated that the proportion of individuals with a prior recorded elevated PHQ (i.e. history of suicidal ideation) would decrease from approximately 50% at the beginning of a trial to about 5%, 50 weeks later. Using electronic health record data, we conducted simulations to estimate the power to detect a 25% reduction in suicide attempts. Simulation-based power calculations estimated that randomizing 8000 participants per randomization arm would allow 90% power to detect a 25% reduction in the suicide attempt rate in the intervention arm compared to usual care at an alpha rate of 0.05. CONCLUSIONS Historical data can be used to inform the design of pragmatic clinical trials, a strength of trials that use automated data collection for randomizing participants and assessing outcomes. In particular, realistic sample size calculations can be conducted using real-world data from the health systems in which the trial will be conducted. Data-informed trial design should yield more realistic estimates of statistical power and maximize efficiency of trial recruitment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan M Shortreed
- 1 Biostatistics Unit, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.,2 Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Andrea J Cook
- 1 Biostatistics Unit, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.,2 Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Gregory E Simon
- 4 Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Herman PM, Kommareddi M, Sorbero ME, Rutter CM, Hays RD, Hilton LG, Ryan GW, Coulter ID. Characteristics of Chiropractic Patients Being Treated for Chronic Low Back and Neck Pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2018; 41:445-455. [PMID: 30121129 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2018.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2017] [Revised: 01/05/2018] [Accepted: 02/12/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Chronic low back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP) are the most common types of chronic pain, and chiropractic spinal manipulation is a common nonpharmacologic treatment. This study presents the characteristics of a large United States sample of chiropractic patients with CLBP and CNP. METHODS Data were collected from chiropractic patients using multistage systematic stratified sampling with 4 sampling levels: regions and states, sites (ie, metropolitan areas), providers and clinics, and patients. The sites and regions were San Diego, California; Tampa, Florida; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Seneca Falls and Upstate New York; Portland, Oregon; and Dallas, Texas. Data were collected from patients through an iPad-based prescreening questionnaire in the clinic and emailed links to full screening and baseline online questionnaires. The goal was 20 providers or clinics and 7 patients with CLBP and 7 with CNP from each clinic. RESULTS We had 6342 patients at 125 clinics complete the prescreening questionnaire, 3333 patients start the full screening questionnaire, and 2024 eligible patients completed the baseline questionnaire: 518 with CLBP only, 347 with CNP only, and 1159 with both. In general, most of this sample were highly-educated, non-Hispanic, white females with at least partial insurance coverage for chiropractic care who have been in pain and using chiropractic care for years. Over 90% reported high satisfaction with their care, few used narcotics, and avoiding surgery was the most important reason they chose chiropractic care. CONCLUSIONS Given the prevalence of CLBP and CNP, the need to find effective nonpharmacologic alternatives for chronic pain, and the satisfaction these patients found with their care, further study of these patients is worthwhile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Ron D Hays
- University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Rutter CM, Kim JJ, Meester RGS, Sprague BL, Burger EA, Zauber AG, Ergun MA, Campos NG, Doubeni CA, Trentham-Dietz A, Sy S, Alagoz O, Stout N, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Corley DA, Tosteson ANA. Effect of Time to Diagnostic Testing for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Abnormalities on Screening Efficacy: A Modeling Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018; 27:158-164. [PMID: 29150480 PMCID: PMC5809257 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-17-0378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2017] [Revised: 09/25/2017] [Accepted: 11/09/2017] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Patients who receive an abnormal cancer screening result require follow-up for diagnostic testing, but the time to follow-up varies across patients and practices.Methods: We used a simulation study to estimate the change in lifetime screening benefits when time to follow-up for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers was increased. Estimates were based on four independently developed microsimulation models that each simulated the life course of adults eligible for breast (women ages 50-74 years), cervical (women ages 21-65 years), or colorectal (adults ages 50-75 years) cancer screening. We assumed screening based on biennial mammography for breast cancer, triennial Papanicolaou testing for cervical cancer, and annual fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer. For each cancer type, we simulated diagnostic testing immediately and at 3, 6, and 12 months after an abnormal screening exam.Results: We found declines in screening benefit with longer times to diagnostic testing, particularly for breast cancer screening. Compared to immediate diagnostic testing, testing at 3 months resulted in reduced screening benefit, with fewer undiscounted life years gained per 1,000 screened (breast: 17.3%, cervical: 0.8%, colorectal: 2.0% and 2.7%, from two colorectal cancer models), fewer cancers prevented (cervical: 1.4% fewer, colorectal: 0.5% and 1.7% fewer, respectively), and, for breast and colorectal cancer, a less favorable stage distribution.Conclusions: Longer times to diagnostic testing after an abnormal screening test can decrease screening effectiveness, but the impact varies substantially by cancer type.Impact: Understanding the impact of time to diagnostic testing on screening effectiveness can help inform quality improvement efforts. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(2); 158-64. ©2017 AACR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jane J Kim
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Reinier G S Meester
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Brian L Sprague
- Departments of Surgery and Radiology, University of Vermont Cancer Center, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Emily A Burger
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Mehmet Ali Ergun
- Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Nicole G Campos
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Amy Trentham-Dietz
- Department of Population Health Sciences and Carbone Cancer Center, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Stephen Sy
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Oguzhan Alagoz
- Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Natasha Stout
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Anna N A Tosteson
- Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon New Hampshire
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Hunter SB, Rutter CM, Ober AJ, Booth MS. Building capacity for continuous quality improvement (CQI): A pilot study. J Subst Abuse Treat 2017; 81:44-52. [PMID: 28847454 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.07.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2017] [Revised: 07/31/2017] [Accepted: 07/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Little is known about the feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of CQI approaches in substance use disorder treatment settings. METHODS In the initial phase of this study, eight programs were randomly assigned to receive a CQI intervention or to a waitlist control condition to obtain preliminary information about potential effectiveness. In the second phase, the initially assigned control programs received the CQI intervention to gain additional information about intervention feasibility while sustainability was explored among the initially assigned intervention programs. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Although CQI was feasible and sustainable, demonstrating its effectiveness using administrative data was challenging suggesting the need to better align performance measurement systems with CQI efforts. Further, although the majority of staff were enthusiastic about utilizing this approach and reported provider and patient benefits, many noted that dedicated time was needed in order to implement and sustain it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah B Hunter
- Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA.
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA.
| | - Allison J Ober
- Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA.
| | - Marika S Booth
- Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
|
36
|
Hubbard RA, Johnson E, Chubak J, Wernli KJ, Kamineni A, Bogart A, Rutter CM. Accounting for misclassification in electronic health records-derived exposures using generalized linear finite mixture models. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2017; 17:101-112. [PMID: 28943779 PMCID: PMC5608281 DOI: 10.1007/s10742-016-0149-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2015] [Revised: 04/27/2016] [Accepted: 05/26/2016] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Exposures derived from electronic health records (EHR) may be misclassified, leading to biased estimates of their association with outcomes of interest. An example of this problem arises in the context of cancer screening where test indication, the purpose for which a test was performed, is often unavailable. This poses a challenge to understanding the effectiveness of screening tests because estimates of screening test effectiveness are biased if some diagnostic tests are misclassified as screening. Prediction models have been developed for a variety of exposure variables that can be derived from EHR, but no previous research has investigated appropriate methods for obtaining unbiased association estimates using these predicted probabilities. The full likelihood incorporating information on both the predicted probability of exposure-class membership and the association between the exposure and outcome of interest can be expressed using a finite mixture model. When the regression model of interest is a generalized linear model (GLM), the expectation-maximization algorithm can be used to estimate the parameters using standard software for GLMs. Using simulation studies, we compared the bias and efficiency of this mixture model approach to alternative approaches including multiple imputation and dichotomization of the predicted probabilities to create a proxy for the missing predictor. The mixture model was the only approach that was unbiased across all scenarios investigated. Finally, we explored the performance of these alternatives in a study of colorectal cancer screening with colonoscopy. These findings have broad applicability in studies using EHR data where gold-standard exposures are unavailable and prediction models have been developed for estimating proxies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca A Hubbard
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Eric Johnson
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Jessica Chubak
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Karen J Wernli
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Andy Bogart
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Rebecca A. Hubbard); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington (Eric Johnson, Jessica Chubak, Karen J. Wernli, Aruna Kamineni); Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (Jessica Chubak); RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California (Andy Bogart, Carolyn M. Rutter)
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
|
38
|
Chubak J, Garcia MP, Burnett-Hartman AN, Zheng Y, Corley DA, Halm EA, Singal AG, Klabunde CN, Doubeni CA, Kamineni A, Levin TR, Schottinger JE, Green BB, Quinn VP, Rutter CM. Time to Colonoscopy after Positive Fecal Blood Test in Four U.S. Health Care Systems. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016; 25:344-50. [PMID: 26843520 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-15-0470] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Andrea N Burnett-Hartman
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, Colorado
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | | - Ethan A Halm
- Departments of Internal Medicine and Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Amit G Singal
- Departments of Internal Medicine and Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Parast L, Rutter CM. Discussion of "A risk-based measure of time-varying prognostic discrimination for survival models," by C. Jason Liang and Patrick J. Heagerty. Biometrics 2016; 73:742-744. [PMID: 27933633 DOI: 10.1111/biom.12630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Layla Parast
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, U.S.A
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Halm EA, Beaber EF, McLerran D, Chubak J, Corley DA, Rutter CM, Doubeni CA, Haas JS, Balasubramanian BA. Association Between Primary Care Visits and Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes in the Era of Population Health Outreach. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31:1190-7. [PMID: 27279097 PMCID: PMC5023609 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-016-3760-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2015] [Revised: 04/06/2016] [Accepted: 05/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Population outreach strategies are increasingly used to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The influence of primary care on cancer screening in this context is unknown. OBJECTIVE To assess associations between primary care provider (PCP) visits and receipt of CRC screening and colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical (FIT) or fecal occult blood test (FOBT). DESIGN Population-based cohort study. PARTICIPANTS A total of 968,072 patients ages 50-74 years who were not up to date with CRC screening in 2011 in four integrated healthcare systems (three with screening outreach programs using FIT kits) in the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium. MEASURES Demographic, clinical, PCP visit, and CRC screening data were obtained from electronic health records and administrative databases. We examined associations between PCP visits in 2011 and receipt of FIT/FOBT, screening colonoscopy, or flexible sigmoidoscopy (CRC screening) in 2012 and follow-up colonoscopy within 3 months of a positive FIT/FOBT in 2012. We used multivariable logistic regression and propensity score models to adjust for confounding. RESULTS Fifty-eight percent of eligible patients completed a CRC screening test in 2012, most by FIT. Those with a greater number of PCP visits had higher rates of CRC screening at all sites. Patients with ≥1 PCP visit had nearly twice the adjusted-odds of CRC screening (OR = 1.88, 95 % CI: 1.86-1.89). Overall, 79.6 % of patients with a positive FIT/FOBT completed colonoscopy within 3 months. Patients with ≥1 PCP visit had 30 % higher adjusted odds of completing colonoscopy after positive FIT/FOBT (OR = 1.30; 95 % CI: 1.22-1.40). CONCLUSIONS Patients with a greater number of PCP visits had higher rates of both incident CRC screening and colonoscopy after positive FIT/FOBT, even in health systems with active population health outreach programs. In this era of virtual care and population outreach, primary care visits remain an important mechanism for engaging patients in cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ethan A Halm
- Departments of Internal Medicine and Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
| | - Elisabeth F Beaber
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Dale McLerran
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Douglas A Corley
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA
| | | | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Bijal A Balasubramanian
- Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics & Environmental Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
McCarthy AM, Kim JJ, Beaber EF, Zheng Y, Burnett-Hartman A, Chubak J, Ghai NR, McLerran D, Breen N, Conant EF, Geller BM, Green BB, Klabunde CN, Inrig S, Skinner CS, Quinn VP, Haas JS, Schnall M, Rutter CM, Barlow WE, Corley DA, Armstrong K, Doubeni CA. Follow-Up of Abnormal Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening by Race/Ethnicity. Am J Prev Med 2016; 51:507-12. [PMID: 27132628 PMCID: PMC5030116 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2015] [Revised: 03/14/2016] [Accepted: 03/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Timely follow-up of abnormal tests is critical to the effectiveness of cancer screening, but may vary by screening test, healthcare system, and sociodemographic group. METHODS Timely follow-up of abnormal mammogram and fecal occult blood testing or fecal immunochemical tests (FOBT/FIT) were compared by race/ethnicity using Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium data. Participants were women with an abnormal mammogram (aged 40-75 years) or FOBT/FIT (aged 50-75 years) in 2010-2012. Analyses were performed in 2015. Timely follow-up was defined as colonoscopy ≤3 months following positive FOBT/FIT; additional imaging or biopsy ≤3 months following Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 0, 4, or 5 mammograms; or ≤9 months following Category 3 mammograms. Logistic regression was used to model receipt of timely follow-up adjusting for study site, age, year, insurance, and income. RESULTS Among 166,602 mammograms, 10.7% were abnormal; among 566,781 FOBT/FITs, 4.3% were abnormal. Nearly 96% of patients with abnormal mammograms received timely follow-up versus 68% with abnormal FOBT/FIT. There was greater variability in receipt of follow-up across healthcare systems for positive FOBT/FIT than for abnormal mammograms. For mammography, black women were less likely than whites to receive timely follow-up (91.8% vs 96.0%, OR=0.71, 95% CI=0.51, 0.97). For FOBT/FIT, Hispanics were more likely than whites to receive timely follow-up than whites (70.0% vs 67.6%, OR=1.12, 95% CI=1.04, 1.21). CONCLUSIONS Timely follow-up among women was more likely for abnormal mammograms than FOBT/FITs, with small variations in follow-up rates by race/ethnicity and larger variation across healthcare systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Marie McCarthy
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Jane J Kim
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Elisabeth F Beaber
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Department of Biostatistics, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Andrea Burnett-Hartman
- Division of Epidemiology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington; Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, Colorado
| | | | - Nirupa R Ghai
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California
| | - Dale McLerran
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Nancy Breen
- Health Systems and Interventions Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Emily F Conant
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Berta M Geller
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
| | | | | | - Stephen Inrig
- Department of Health Policy and History of Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Health Policy and Management, Mount Saint Mary's University, Los Angeles, California
| | - Celette Sugg Skinner
- Department of Clinical Science and Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Virginia P Quinn
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Mitchell Schnall
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | - William E Barlow
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Douglas A Corley
- Department of Gastroenterology, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California
| | - Katrina Armstrong
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Klabunde CN, Zheng Y, Quinn VP, Beaber EF, Rutter CM, Halm EA, Chubak J, Doubeni CA, Haas JS, Kamineni A, Schapira MM, Vacek PM, Garcia MP, Corley DA. Influence of Age and Comorbidity on Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Elderly. Am J Prev Med 2016; 51:e67-75. [PMID: 27344108 PMCID: PMC4992638 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2015] [Revised: 04/15/2016] [Accepted: 04/15/2016] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Expert recommendations differ for colorectal cancer screening in the elderly. Recent studies suggest that healthy adults aged >75 years may benefit from screening. This study examined screening use and follow-up, and how they varied by health status within age strata, among a large cohort of elderly individuals in community settings. METHODS A population-based, longitudinal cohort study was conducted among health plan members aged 65-89 years enrolled during 2011-2012 in three integrated healthcare systems participating in the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium. Comorbidity measurements used the Charlson index. Analyses, conducted in 2015, comprised descriptive statistics and multivariable modeling that estimated age by comorbidity-specific percentages of patients for two outcomes: colorectal cancer screening uptake and follow-up of abnormal fecal blood tests. RESULTS Among 846,267 patients, 72% were up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening. Of patients with a positive fecal blood test, 65% received follow-up colonoscopy within 3 months. Likelihood of being up-to-date and receiving timely follow-up was significantly lower for patients aged ≥76 years than their younger counterparts (p<0.001). Comorbidity was less influential than age and more strongly related to timely follow-up than being up-to-date. In all age groups, considerable numbers of patients with no/low comorbidity were not up-to-date or did not receive timely follow-up. CONCLUSIONS In three integrated healthcare systems, many older, relatively healthy patients were not screening up-to-date, and some relatively young, healthy patients did not receive timely follow-up. Findings suggest a need for re-evaluating age-based screening guidelines and improving screening completion among the elderly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carrie N Klabunde
- Office of Disease Prevention, Office of the Director, NIH, Rockville, Maryland.
| | - Yingye Zheng
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Virginia P Quinn
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Research and Evaluation, Pasadena, California
| | - Elisabeth F Beaber
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | | - Ethan A Halm
- Departments of Internal Medicine and Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health and Department of Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Marilyn M Schapira
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania and the Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Pamela M Vacek
- Medical Biostatistics Unit, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Michael P Garcia
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alison T Brenner
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Shortreed SM, Johnson E, Rutter CM, Kamineni A, Wernli KJ, Chubak J. Cohort restriction based on prior enrollment: Examining potential biases in estimating cancer and mortality risk. Obs Stud 2016; 2:51-64. [PMID: 28530002 PMCID: PMC5435370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Electronic health records and administrative databases provide rich, longitudinal data for health-related research. These data cover large, diverse populations creating excellent research opportunities, but have limitations. In particular, information is available only for individuals who are enrolled in a particular health system; thus, studies often exclude individual's with short enrollment history. Such cohort restriction may cause selection bias in absolute risk estimates for the full enrollee population. We use hazard ratios (HRs) to estimate the association between length of prior enrollment and cancer and all-cause mortality risk. HRs different from one indicate restricted cohorts would produce biased risk estimates for the full enrollee population. Our study sample included 170,708 enrollees of a Western Washington healthcare delivery system. Unadjusted models found individuals with 10 or more years of prior enrollment had higher risk of cancer and death compared to those with less than 5 years prior enrollment (HRs ranged from 1.29 - 3.01). Age- and sex-adjusted models accounted for much of this difference (HRs: 0.93 - 1.24). Models adjusting for additional covariates had similar results (HRs: 0.91 - 1.14). After evaluating potential selection bias, we conclude that, in this setting, age- and sex-standardizing risk estimates can remove most of the bias due to lengthy, prior-enrollment cohort restrictions. Before generalizing estimates based on a selected sample of patients meeting prior enrollment criteria, researchers should assess the potential for selection bias.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan M Shortreed
- Biostatistics Unit, Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, U.S.A
| | - Eric Johnson
- Biostatistics Unit, Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, U.S.A
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Kuntz KM, Zauber AG, Knudsen AB, Rutter CM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Berger BM, Levin B. A restricted look at CRC screening: not considering annual stool testing as an option. Am J Manag Care 2016; 22:e270-e274. [PMID: 27442311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Karen M Kuntz
- Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. E-mail:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Rutter CM, Knudsen AB, Marsh TL, Doria-Rose VP, Johnson E, Pabiniak C, Kuntz KM, van Ballegooijen M, Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Validation of Models Used to Inform Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Accuracy and Implications. Med Decis Making 2016; 36:604-14. [PMID: 26746432 PMCID: PMC5009464 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x15622642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2015] [Accepted: 10/20/2015] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microsimulation models synthesize evidence about disease processes and interventions, providing a method for predicting long-term benefits and harms of prevention, screening, and treatment strategies. Because models often require assumptions about unobservable processes, assessing a model's predictive accuracy is important. METHODS We validated 3 colorectal cancer (CRC) microsimulation models against outcomes from the United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening (UKFSS) Trial, a randomized controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of one-time flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to reduce CRC mortality. The models incorporate different assumptions about the time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical and symptomatic CRC. Analyses compare model predictions to study estimates across a range of outcomes to provide insight into the accuracy of model assumptions. RESULTS All 3 models accurately predicted the relative reduction in CRC mortality 10 years after screening (predicted hazard ratios, with 95% percentile intervals: 0.56 [0.44, 0.71], 0.63 [0.51, 0.75], 0.68 [0.53, 0.83]; estimated with 95% confidence interval: 0.56 [0.45, 0.69]). Two models with longer average preclinical duration accurately predicted the relative reduction in 10-year CRC incidence. Two models with longer mean sojourn time accurately predicted the number of screen-detected cancers. All 3 models predicted too many proximal adenomas among patients referred to colonoscopy. CONCLUSION Model accuracy can only be established through external validation. Analyses such as these are therefore essential for any decision model. Results supported the assumptions that the average time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical cancer is long (up to 25 years), and mean sojourn time is close to 4 years, suggesting the window for early detection and intervention by screening is relatively long. Variation in dwell time remains uncertain and could have important clinical and policy implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA (ABK)
| | - Tracey L Marsh
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA (TLM)
| | - V Paul Doria-Rose
- National Cancer Institute, Health Systems & Intervention Research Branch, Bethesda, MD, USA (VPD)
| | - Eric Johnson
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA (EJ, CP)
| | | | - Karen M Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA (KMK)
| | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA (AGZ)
| | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Knudsen AB, Zauber AG, Rutter CM, Naber SK, Doria-Rose VP, Pabiniak C, Johanson C, Fischer SE, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuntz KM. Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2016; 315:2595-609. [PMID: 27305518 PMCID: PMC5493310 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.6828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 331] [Impact Index Per Article: 41.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2008 colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations. OBJECTIVE To inform the USPSTF by modeling the benefits, burden, and harms of CRC screening strategies; estimating the optimal ages to begin and end screening; and identifying a set of model-recommendable strategies that provide similar life-years gained (LYG) and a comparable balance between LYG and screening burden. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Comparative modeling with 3 microsimulation models of a hypothetical cohort of previously unscreened US 40-year-olds with no prior CRC diagnosis. EXPOSURES Screening with sensitive guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy with or without stool testing, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), or colonoscopy starting at age 45, 50, or 55 years and ending at age 75, 80, or 85 years. Screening intervals varied by modality. Full adherence for all strategies was assumed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Life-years gained compared with no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies required (burden), lifetime number of colonoscopy complications (harms), and ratios of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios) per 1000 40-year-olds. RESULTS The screening strategies provided LYG in the range of 152 to 313 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden per 1000 persons ranged from fewer than 900 (FIT every 3 years from ages 55-75 years) to more than 7500 (colonoscopy screening every 5 years from ages 45-85 years). Harm from screening was at most 23 complications per 1000 persons screened. Strategies with screening beginning at age 50 years generally provided more LYG as well as more additional LYG per additional colonoscopy than strategies with screening beginning at age 55 years. There were limited empirical data to support a start age of 45 years. For persons adequately screened up to age 75 years, additional screening yielded small increases in LYG relative to the increase in colonoscopy burden. With screening from ages 50 to 75 years, 4 strategies yielded a comparable balance of screening burden and similar LYG (median LYG per 1000 across the models): colonoscopy every 10 years (270 LYG); sigmoidoscopy every 10 years with annual FIT (256 LYG); CTC every 5 years (248 LYG); and annual FIT (244 LYG). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this microsimulation modeling study of a previously unscreened population undergoing CRC screening that assumed 100% adherence, the strategies of colonoscopy every 10 years, annual FIT, sigmoidoscopy every 10 years with annual FIT, and CTC every 5 years performed from ages 50 through 75 years provided similar LYG and a comparable balance of benefit and screening burden.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Steffie K Naber
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - V Paul Doria-Rose
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland
| | | | - Colden Johanson
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts8Currently with Optum, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sara E Fischer
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Karen M Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Lin JS, Piper MA, Perdue LA, Rutter CM, Webber EM, O'Connor E, Smith N, Whitlock EP. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2016; 315:2576-94. [PMID: 27305422 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.3332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 519] [Impact Index Per Article: 64.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the effectiveness, diagnostic accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC. DATA SOURCES Searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2014, with surveillance through February 23, 2016. STUDY SELECTION English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting CRC or adenomas, and serious adverse events. RESULTS Four pragmatic randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating 1-time or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy (n = 458,002) were associated with decreased CRC-specific mortality compared with no screening (incidence rate ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.82). Five RCTs with multiple rounds of biennial screening with guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (n = 419,966) showed reduced CRC-specific mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98, at 19.5 years to RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.93, at 30 years). Seven studies of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) with bowel preparation demonstrated per-person sensitivity and specificity to detect adenomas 6 mm and larger comparable with colonoscopy (sensitivity from 73% [95% CI, 58%-84%] to 98% [95% CI, 91%-100%]; specificity from 89% [95% CI, 84%-93%] to 91% [95% CI, 88%-93%]); variability and imprecision may be due to differences in study designs or CTC protocols. Sensitivity of colonoscopy to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger ranged from 75% (95% CI, 63%-84%) to 93% (95% CI, 88%-96%). On the basis of a single stool specimen, the most commonly evaluated families of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) demonstrated good sensitivity (range, 73%-88%) and specificity (range, 90%-96%). One study (n = 9989) found that FIT plus stool DNA test had better sensitivity in detecting CRC than FIT alone (92%) but lower specificity (84%). Serious adverse events from colonoscopy in asymptomatic persons included perforations (4/10,000 procedures, 95% CI, 2-5 in 10,000) and major bleeds (8/10,000 procedures, 95% CI, 5-14 in 10,000). Computed tomographic colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation exposure or identification of extracolonic findings. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, CTC, and stool tests have differing levels of evidence to support their use, ability to detect cancer and precursor lesions, and risk of serious adverse events in average-risk adults. Although CRC screening has a large body of supporting evidence, additional research is still needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer S Lin
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Margaret A Piper
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Leslie A Perdue
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Carolyn M Rutter
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington3Currently with RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California
| | - Elizabeth M Webber
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Elizabeth O'Connor
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Ning Smith
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| | - Evelyn P Whitlock
- Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Eibner C, Krull H, Brown KM, Cefalu M, Mulcahy AW, Pollard M, Shetty K, Adamson DM, Amaral EFL, Armour P, Beleche T, Bogdan O, Hastings J, Kapinos K, Kress A, Mendelsohn J, Ross R, Rutter CM, Weinick RM, Woods D, Hosek SD, Farmer CM. Current and Projected Characteristics and Unique Health Care Needs of the Patient Population Served by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Rand Health Q 2016; 5:13. [PMID: 28083423 PMCID: PMC5158228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
The Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 addressed the need for access to timely, high-quality health care for veterans. Section 201 of the legislation called for an independent assessment of various aspects of veterans' health care. The RAND Corporation was tasked with an assessment of the current and projected demographics and health care needs of patients served by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The number of U.S. veterans will continue to decline over the next decade, and the demographic mix and geographic locations of these veterans will change. While the number of veterans using VA health care has increased over time, demand will level off in the coming years. Veterans have more favorable economic circumstances than non-veterans, but they are also older and more likely to be diagnosed with many health conditions. Not all veterans are eligible for or use VA health care. Whether and to what extent an eligible veteran uses VA health care depends on a number of factors, including access to other sources of health care. Veterans who rely on VA health care are older and less healthy than veterans who do not, and the prevalence of costly conditions in this population is projected to increase. Potential changes to VA policy and the context for VA health care, including effects of the Affordable Care Act, could affect demand. Analysis of a range of data sources provided insight into how the veteran population is likely to change in the next decade.
Collapse
|
50
|
Hussey PS, Ringel JS, Ahluwalia S, Price RA, Buttorff C, Concannon TW, Lovejoy SL, Martsolf GR, Rudin RS, Schultz D, Sloss EM, Watkins KE, Waxman D, Bauman M, Briscombe B, Broyles JR, Burns RM, Chen EK, DeSantis ASJ, Ecola L, Fischer SH, Friedberg MW, Gidengil CA, Ginsburg PB, Gulden T, Gutierrez CI, Hirshman S, Huang CY, Kandrack R, Kress A, Leuschner KJ, MacCarthy S, Maksabedian EJ, Mann S, Matthews LJ, May LW, Mishra N, Miyashiro L, Muchow AN, Nelson J, Naranjo D, O'Hanlon CE, Pillemer F, Predmore Z, Ross R, Ruder T, Rutter CM, Uscher-Pines L, Vaiana ME, Vesely JV, Hosek SD, Farmer CM. Resources and Capabilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs to Provide Timely and Accessible Care to Veterans. Rand Health Q 2016; 5:14. [PMID: 28083424 PMCID: PMC5158229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
The Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 addressed the need for access to timely, high-quality health care for veterans. Section 201 of the legislation called for an independent assessment of various aspects of veterans' health care. The RAND Corporation was tasked with an assessment of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) current and projected health care capabilities and resources. An examination of data from a variety of sources, along with a survey of VA medical facility leaders, revealed the breadth and depth of VA resources and capabilities: fiscal resources, workforce and human resources, physical infrastructure, interorganizational relationships, and information resources. The assessment identified barriers to the effective use of these resources and capabilities. Analysis of data on access to VA care and the quality of that care showed that almost all veterans live within 40 miles of a VA health facility, but fewer have access to VA specialty care. Veterans usually receive care within 14 days of their desired appointment date, but wait times vary considerably across VA facilities. VA has long played a national leadership role in measuring the quality of health care. The assessment showed that VA health care quality was as good or better on most measures compared with other health systems, but quality performance lagged at some VA facilities. VA will require more resources and capabilities to meet a projected increase in veterans' demand for VA care over the next five years. Options for increasing capacity include accelerated hiring, full nurse practice authority, and expanded use of telehealth.
Collapse
|