Invitation letters increase participation in colorectal cancer screening – results from an observational study

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (12) ◽  
pp. 1307-1312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tianzuo Zhan ◽  
Thomas Hielscher ◽  
Asmé Bilge ◽  
Thomas Giese ◽  
Christoph Schäfer ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Aim Participation rates in the German colorectal cancer screening program are low. Starting in 2013, a large health insurance plan in Bavaria, Germany, is sending an additional invitation letter to insured individuals when they turn 50 or 55 years and become eligible for participation in the program. The letter provides detailed information on colorectal cancer screening. We assessed the impact of the invitation letter on utilization rates. Methods Insurance claims data of a total of 48 343 individuals who had turned 50 or 55 years between 2012 to 2014 were reviewed for utilization rates of screening colonoscopy and fecal blood tests. Utilization rates 1 year prior (2012) and 2 years after introduction of the invitation letter (2013 and 2014) were compared. Furthermore, providers of colorectal cancer screening were determined. Results Within 6 months after turning 50 or 55 years, 8.8 – 10.2 % of all insured individuals participated in colorectal cancer screening, with the majority being females. After the introduction of the invitation letter, a moderate increase in participation rates could be observed (increase to 109 % [RR 101.7 – 117.3 %, p = 0.02] in 2014). The uptake rate of screening colonoscopy was significantly higher in recipients of the letter (increase to 138.4 % [RR 110.4 – 173.8 %, p = 0.0043] in 2013 and to 149 % [RR 119.5 – 186.3 %, p = 0.0003] in 2014). Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of general practitioners and gastroenterologists provided colorectal cancer screening in individuals receiving the invitation letter. Conclusions Introduction of an invitation letter can improve participation rates for colorectal cancer screening.

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 1129
Author(s):  
Audrius Dulskas ◽  
Tomas Poskus ◽  
Inga Kildusiene ◽  
Ausvydas Patasius ◽  
Rokas Stulpinas ◽  
...  

We aimed to report the results of the implementation of the National Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Program covering all the country. The National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) reimburses the institutions for performing each service; each procedure within the program has its own administrative code. Information about services provided within the program was retrieved from the database of NHIF starting from the 1 January 2014 to the 31 December 2018. Exact date and type of all provided services, test results, date and results of biopsy and histopathological examination were extracted together with the vital status at the end of follow-up, date of death and date of emigration when applicable for all men and women born between 1935 and 1968. Results were compared with the guidelines of the European Union for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis. The screening uptake was 49.5% (754,061 patients) during study period. Participation rate varied from 16% to 18.1% per year and was higher among women than among men. Proportion of test-positive and test-negative results was similar during all the study period—8.7% and 91.3% annually. Between 9.2% and 13.5% of test-positive patients received a biopsy of which 52.3–61.8% were positive for colorectal adenoma and 4.6–7.3% for colorectal carcinoma. CRC detection rate among test-positive individuals varied between 0.93% and 1.28%. The colorectal cancer screening program in Lithuania coverage must be improved. A screening database is needed to systematically evaluate the impact and performance of the national CRC screening program and quality assurance within the program.


Author(s):  
Alicia Brotons ◽  
Mercedes Guilabert ◽  
Francisco Lacueva ◽  
José Mira ◽  
Blanca Lumbreras ◽  
...  

Colonoscopy services working in colorectal cancer screening programs must perform periodic controls to improve the quality based on patients’ experiences. However, there are no validated instruments in this setting that include the two core dimensions for optimal care: satisfaction and safety. The aim of this study was to design and validate a specific questionnaire for patients undergoing screening colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test, the Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire based on patients’ experience (CSSQP). The design included a review of available evidence and used focus groups to identify the relevant dimensions to produce the instrument (content validity). Face validity was analyzed involving 15 patients. Reliability and construct and empirical validity were calculated. Validation involved patients from the colorectal cancer screening program at two referral hospitals in Spain. The CSSQP version 1 consisted of 15 items. The principal components analysis of the satisfaction items isolated three factors with saturation of elements above 0.52 and with high internal consistency and split-half readability: Information, Care, and Service and Facilities features. The analysis of the safety items isolated two factors with element saturations above 0.58: Information Gaps and Safety Incidents. The CSSQP is a new valid and reliable tool for measuring patient’ experiences, including satisfaction and safety perception, after a colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3599-3599
Author(s):  
David Mansouri ◽  
Donald C. Mcmillan ◽  
Emilia M Crighton ◽  
Paul G Horgan

3599 Background: Population-based FOBt colorectal cancer screening has been shown to reduce cancer specific mortality and is used across the UK. Despite evidence that socioeconomic deprivation is associated with increased incidence of colorectal cancer, uptake of screening may be lower in those who are more deprived. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of deprivation on the screening process. Methods: A prospectively maintained database, encompassing the first screening round in a single geographical area, was analysed with deprivation categories calculated from the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2009. Results: Overall, 395,698 individuals were invited to screening, 204,812(52%) participated and 6,094(3%) tested positive. 32% of screened individuals were in the most deprived quintile. Of the positive tests, 5,457(95%) agreed to be pre-assessed for colonoscopy. 839(16%) did not proceed to colonoscopy following pre-assessment. Of the 4,618 that attended for colonoscopy, cancer was detected in 7%. Colonoscopy results were not recorded in 1,035(22%) cases. Lower uptake of screening was seen in males, those that were younger and those who were more deprived (p<0.001). Higher levels of deprivation were also associated with not proceeding to colonoscopy following pre-assessment (p<0.001). Higher positivity rates were seen in males, those that were older and more deprived (p<0.001). Despite higher positivity rates in the more deprived individuals (4% most deprived vs 2% least deprived, p<0.001), the positive predictive value of detecting cancer in those attending for colonoscopy was lower in those who were more deprived (6% most deprived vs 8% least deprived, p=0.040). Conclusions: Socioeconomic deprivation has a significant effect throughout the FOBt screening process. Individuals who are more deprived are less likely to participate in screening, less likely to complete the screening process and less likely to have cancer identified as a result of a positive test. This study adds further weight to existing evidence that individuals who are more deprived are less likely to engage in population-based FOBt colorectal cancer screening. Novel strategies to improve this are required.


Endoscopy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Benazzato ◽  
Manuel Zorzi ◽  
Giulio Antonelli ◽  
Stefano Guzzinati ◽  
Cesare Hassan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Post-colonoscopy adverse events are a key quality indicator in population-based colorectal cancer screening programs, and affect safety and costs. This study aimed to assess colonoscopy-related adverse events and mortality in a screening setting. Methods We retrieved data from patients undergoing colonoscopy within a screening program (fecal immunochemical test every 2 years, 50–69-year-olds, or post-polypectomy surveillance) in Italy between 2002 and 2014, to assess the rate of post-colonoscopy adverse events and mortality. Any admission within 30 days of screening colonoscopy was reviewed to capture possible events. Mortality registries were also matched with endoscopy databases to investigate 30-day post-colonoscopy mortality. Association of each outcome with patient-/procedure-related variables was assessed using multivariable analysis. Results Overall, 117 881 screening colonoscopies (66 584, 56.5 %, with polypectomy) were included. Overall, 497 (0.42 %) post-colonoscopy adverse events occurred: 281 (0.24 %) bleedings (3.69‰/0.68‰, operative/diagnostic procedures) and 65 (0.06 %) perforations (0.75‰/0.29‰, respectively). At multivariable analysis, bleeding was associated with polyp size (≥ 20 mm: odds ratio [OR] 16.29, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 9.38–28.29), proximal location (OR 1.46, 95 %CI 1.14–1.87), and histology severity (high risk adenoma: OR 5.6, 95 %CI 2.43–12.91), while perforation was associated with endoscopic resection (OR 2.91, 95 %CI 1.62–5.22), polyp size (OR 4.34, 95 %CI 1.46–12.92), and proximal location (OR 1.94, 95 %CI 1.12–3.37). Post-colonoscopy mortality occurred in 15 /117 881 cases (1.27/10 000 colonoscopies). Conclusions In an organized screening program, post-colonoscopy adverse events were rare but not negligible. The most frequent event was post-polypectomy bleeding, especially after resection of large (≥ 20 mm) and proximal lesions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 173-173
Author(s):  
Nicki Cunningham ◽  
Christine Stogios ◽  
Shama Umar ◽  
Dafna Carr ◽  
Jason Garay ◽  
...  

173 Background: Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) developed the ColonCancerCheck Screening Activity Report (CCC SAR) as a supplementary tool for primary care physicians (PCPs) who are part of a patient enrolment model in Ontario, Canada to support them in increasing their colorectal cancer screening rates and appropriate follow-ups. The report provides PCPs with a summary of their eligible patients’ colorectal cancer screening-related history and was designed with the intent of supporting both population health management and opportunistic screening. Delivered through an online platform, the SAR offers PCPs access to data to facilitate quality cancer screening practices aligned with CCO’s evidence-based clinical guidelines. Methods: The report leverages provincial datasets to summarize screening activities on a per-patient level and actionable follow-up recommendations based on CCO’s clinical guidelines. To evaluate the impact of the reports on colorectal screening participation rates, a Generalized Estimating Equation model was used. Results: Results on the report’s impact on colorectal cancer screening participation rates from the first release (February 2013) are promising. By identifying for PCPs which patients are overdue for screening, the SAR demonstrated a modest and statistically significant 6% increased likelihood of patients being screened using a Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) if their PCP was registered to access the online report, compared to patients of unregistered PCPs. The impact to screening increased to 25% when comparing registered PCPs who logged in and viewed their SAR to registered PCPs who did not login; however, this analysis is at a greater risk of a volunteer bias. Such PCPs may be more likely to screen their patients independent of viewing their SAR. Conclusions: By equipping PCPs with patient-level data grounded in CCO’s evidence-based clinical guidelines, the SAR is innovative in its potential to increase screening rates and the appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. The successful launch of two online CCC SARs, sharing meaningful colorectal cancer screening data to frontline providers, has driven the report’s expansion to include breast and cervical cancer screening data in spring of 2014.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1401-1410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara Kiran ◽  
Richard H. Glazier ◽  
Rahim Moineddin ◽  
Sumei Gu ◽  
Andrew S. Wilton ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document