Cargando…

An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The CarePath-CRC electronic clinical decision-making application was designed to assist physicians with evaluation of patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). The physician completes an interactive checklist of evidence-based clinical parameters, and a recommended...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Forbes, Nauzer, Cooray, Mohan, Hackett, Michael, Shah, Nishwa, Yuan, Yuhong, Antiperovitch, Pavel, Corner, Tracey, Chan, David, Mills, Michael, Armstrong, David, Xenodemetropoulos, Ted
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7465547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32905126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwz013
_version_ 1783577612213288960
author Forbes, Nauzer
Cooray, Mohan
Hackett, Michael
Shah, Nishwa
Yuan, Yuhong
Antiperovitch, Pavel
Corner, Tracey
Chan, David
Mills, Michael
Armstrong, David
Xenodemetropoulos, Ted
author_facet Forbes, Nauzer
Cooray, Mohan
Hackett, Michael
Shah, Nishwa
Yuan, Yuhong
Antiperovitch, Pavel
Corner, Tracey
Chan, David
Mills, Michael
Armstrong, David
Xenodemetropoulos, Ted
author_sort Forbes, Nauzer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The CarePath-CRC electronic clinical decision-making application was designed to assist physicians with evaluation of patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). The physician completes an interactive checklist of evidence-based clinical parameters, and a recommended referral urgency is generated based on the post-test probability of CRC. This study aimed toward validation of the tool in symptomatic patients presenting with rectal bleeding. METHODS: The medical records of a sample of patients with histologically confirmed CRC from 2010 to 2014 were reviewed. The CarePath-CRC tool was applied retrospectively to all patients who initially presented with rectal bleeding, to determine its sensitivity for detecting CRC in this population. A generated recommendation of ‘immediate referral’ (referral ≤24 hours, expected endoscopy ≤2 weeks) or ‘urgent referral’ (expected consultation and endoscopy ≤4 and ≤8 weeks) was considered a positive test result. An a priori sensitivity of 90% was deemed adequate, based on test characteristics of the tool’s individual clinical criteria. RESULTS: The tool was applied to 281 patients. A total of 69 (24.6%) and 211 (75.1%) patients met criteria for immediate and urgent referral, respectively. The remaining patient (0.4%) met criteria for ‘possible priority referral’, while none met criteria for ‘no specific action recommended’. This resulted in a calculated sensitivity of 99.6% (95% confidence interval 98.0 to 99.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The CarePath-CRC tool is sensitive in the prediction of CRC in patients presenting with rectal bleeding. A prospective cohort study is being designed to allow for acquisition of comprehensive test performance characteristics and full validation of the instrument.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7465547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74655472020-09-03 An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding Forbes, Nauzer Cooray, Mohan Hackett, Michael Shah, Nishwa Yuan, Yuhong Antiperovitch, Pavel Corner, Tracey Chan, David Mills, Michael Armstrong, David Xenodemetropoulos, Ted J Can Assoc Gastroenterol Original Articles BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The CarePath-CRC electronic clinical decision-making application was designed to assist physicians with evaluation of patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). The physician completes an interactive checklist of evidence-based clinical parameters, and a recommended referral urgency is generated based on the post-test probability of CRC. This study aimed toward validation of the tool in symptomatic patients presenting with rectal bleeding. METHODS: The medical records of a sample of patients with histologically confirmed CRC from 2010 to 2014 were reviewed. The CarePath-CRC tool was applied retrospectively to all patients who initially presented with rectal bleeding, to determine its sensitivity for detecting CRC in this population. A generated recommendation of ‘immediate referral’ (referral ≤24 hours, expected endoscopy ≤2 weeks) or ‘urgent referral’ (expected consultation and endoscopy ≤4 and ≤8 weeks) was considered a positive test result. An a priori sensitivity of 90% was deemed adequate, based on test characteristics of the tool’s individual clinical criteria. RESULTS: The tool was applied to 281 patients. A total of 69 (24.6%) and 211 (75.1%) patients met criteria for immediate and urgent referral, respectively. The remaining patient (0.4%) met criteria for ‘possible priority referral’, while none met criteria for ‘no specific action recommended’. This resulted in a calculated sensitivity of 99.6% (95% confidence interval 98.0 to 99.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The CarePath-CRC tool is sensitive in the prediction of CRC in patients presenting with rectal bleeding. A prospective cohort study is being designed to allow for acquisition of comprehensive test performance characteristics and full validation of the instrument. Oxford University Press 2020-10 2019-05-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7465547/ /pubmed/32905126 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwz013 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Forbes, Nauzer
Cooray, Mohan
Hackett, Michael
Shah, Nishwa
Yuan, Yuhong
Antiperovitch, Pavel
Corner, Tracey
Chan, David
Mills, Michael
Armstrong, David
Xenodemetropoulos, Ted
An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title_full An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title_fullStr An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title_full_unstemmed An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title_short An Electronic Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer—Preliminary Evaluation in Patients Presenting with Rectal Bleeding
title_sort electronic clinical decision-making tool for patients with suspected colorectal cancer—preliminary evaluation in patients presenting with rectal bleeding
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7465547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32905126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwz013
work_keys_str_mv AT forbesnauzer anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT cooraymohan anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT hackettmichael anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT shahnishwa anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT yuanyuhong anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT antiperovitchpavel anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT cornertracey anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT chandavid anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT millsmichael anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT armstrongdavid anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT xenodemetropoulosted anelectronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT forbesnauzer electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT cooraymohan electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT hackettmichael electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT shahnishwa electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT yuanyuhong electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT antiperovitchpavel electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT cornertracey electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT chandavid electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT millsmichael electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT armstrongdavid electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding
AT xenodemetropoulosted electronicclinicaldecisionmakingtoolforpatientswithsuspectedcolorectalcancerpreliminaryevaluationinpatientspresentingwithrectalbleeding