Cargando…

Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured

INTRODUCTION: Screening can decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Poor quality of colorectal cancer screening can negate the benefit of screening. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of screening services provided by...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nadel, Marion R., Royalty, Janet, Joseph, Djenaba, Rockwell, Tanner, Helsel, William, Kammerer, William, Gray, Simone C., Shapiro, Jean A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6549419/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31146803
http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd16.180452
_version_ 1783424004680318976
author Nadel, Marion R.
Royalty, Janet
Joseph, Djenaba
Rockwell, Tanner
Helsel, William
Kammerer, William
Gray, Simone C.
Shapiro, Jean A.
author_facet Nadel, Marion R.
Royalty, Janet
Joseph, Djenaba
Rockwell, Tanner
Helsel, William
Kammerer, William
Gray, Simone C.
Shapiro, Jean A.
author_sort Nadel, Marion R.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Screening can decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Poor quality of colorectal cancer screening can negate the benefit of screening. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of screening services provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program from July 2009 through June 2015. METHODS: We collected data from the program’s 29 grantees, funded to provide colorectal cancer screening and diagnostic services to asymptomatic, low-income, and underinsured or uninsured adults aged 50 to 64. We collected data on the dates and results of all screening and diagnostic tests and, for colonoscopies, on whether the cecum was reached, whether bowel preparation was adequate, and endoscopists’ recommendations for the next test. RESULTS: Overall, 82.9% (range among grantees, 50.0%–97.2%) of positive FOBTs/FITs were followed up by colonoscopy; 95.2% of colonoscopies occurred within 180 days of the positive stool test. Cecal intubation rates ranged among grantees from 94.2% to 100%. Adenoma detection rates met recommended threshold levels for almost all grantees. Recommendations for rescreening and surveillance intervals deviated from guidelines in both directions. Of clients with normal colonoscopies, 85.3% (range, 37.7%–99.7%) were told to return in 10 years, as recommended in national guidelines. Of clients with advanced adenomas, 55.2% (range, 20.0%–84.6%) were told to return in 3 years as recommended, 25.4% (range, 3.8%–56.6%) in 5 or more years, and 18.6% (range, 0%–47.2%) in less than 3 years. CONCLUSION: Although overall screening quality was good, it varied considerably. Ongoing monitoring to identify performance problems is essential for all colorectal cancer screening activities, so that efforts designed to improve performance can be targeted to individual clinicians.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6549419
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65494192019-06-18 Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured Nadel, Marion R. Royalty, Janet Joseph, Djenaba Rockwell, Tanner Helsel, William Kammerer, William Gray, Simone C. Shapiro, Jean A. Prev Chronic Dis Original Research INTRODUCTION: Screening can decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Poor quality of colorectal cancer screening can negate the benefit of screening. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of screening services provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program from July 2009 through June 2015. METHODS: We collected data from the program’s 29 grantees, funded to provide colorectal cancer screening and diagnostic services to asymptomatic, low-income, and underinsured or uninsured adults aged 50 to 64. We collected data on the dates and results of all screening and diagnostic tests and, for colonoscopies, on whether the cecum was reached, whether bowel preparation was adequate, and endoscopists’ recommendations for the next test. RESULTS: Overall, 82.9% (range among grantees, 50.0%–97.2%) of positive FOBTs/FITs were followed up by colonoscopy; 95.2% of colonoscopies occurred within 180 days of the positive stool test. Cecal intubation rates ranged among grantees from 94.2% to 100%. Adenoma detection rates met recommended threshold levels for almost all grantees. Recommendations for rescreening and surveillance intervals deviated from guidelines in both directions. Of clients with normal colonoscopies, 85.3% (range, 37.7%–99.7%) were told to return in 10 years, as recommended in national guidelines. Of clients with advanced adenomas, 55.2% (range, 20.0%–84.6%) were told to return in 3 years as recommended, 25.4% (range, 3.8%–56.6%) in 5 or more years, and 18.6% (range, 0%–47.2%) in less than 3 years. CONCLUSION: Although overall screening quality was good, it varied considerably. Ongoing monitoring to identify performance problems is essential for all colorectal cancer screening activities, so that efforts designed to improve performance can be targeted to individual clinicians. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2019-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6549419/ /pubmed/31146803 http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd16.180452 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is a publication of the U.S. Government. This publication is in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from this work may be reprinted freely. Use of these materials should be properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Nadel, Marion R.
Royalty, Janet
Joseph, Djenaba
Rockwell, Tanner
Helsel, William
Kammerer, William
Gray, Simone C.
Shapiro, Jean A.
Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title_full Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title_fullStr Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title_full_unstemmed Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title_short Variations in Screening Quality in a Federal Colorectal Cancer Screening Program for the Uninsured
title_sort variations in screening quality in a federal colorectal cancer screening program for the uninsured
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6549419/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31146803
http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd16.180452
work_keys_str_mv AT nadelmarionr variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT royaltyjanet variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT josephdjenaba variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT rockwelltanner variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT helselwilliam variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT kammererwilliam variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT graysimonec variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured
AT shapirojeana variationsinscreeningqualityinafederalcolorectalcancerscreeningprogramfortheuninsured