scholarly journals Primary Care Provider Perceptions of Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers: Implications for Designing Quality Improvement Interventions

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Weiss ◽  
Perry J. Pickhardt ◽  
Jessica R. Schumacher ◽  
Aaron Potvien ◽  
David H. Kim ◽  
...  

Aims. Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized. Increasing CRC screening rates requires interventions targeting multiple barriers at each level of the healthcare organization (patient, provider, and system). We examined groups of primary care providers (PCPs) based on perceptions of screening barriers and the relationship to CRC screening rates to inform approaches for conducting barrier assessments prior to designing and implementing quality improvement interventions.Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study linking EHR and survey data. PCPs with complete survey responses for questions addressing CRC screening barriers were included (N=166PCPs; 39,430 patients eligible for CRC screening). Cluster analysis identified groups of PCPs. Multivariate logistic regression estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for predictors of membership in one of the PCP groups.Results. We found two distinct groups: (1) PCPs identifying multiple barriers to CRC screening at patient, provider, and system levels (N=75) and (2) PCPs identifying no major barriers to screening (N=91). PCPs in the top half of CRC screening performance were more likely to identify multiple barriers than the bottom performers (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 2.43–7.08).Conclusions. High-performing PCPs can more effectively identify CRC screening barriers. Targeting high-performers when conducting a barrier assessment is a novel approach to assist in designing quality improvement interventions for CRC screening.

Author(s):  
Jessica Law ◽  
Jeannine Viczko ◽  
Robert Hilsden ◽  
Emily McKenzie ◽  
Mark Watt ◽  
...  

IntroductionColorectal cancer (CRC) screening is associated with significant reductions in burden, mortality and cost. Primary care providers in Alberta do not have access to integrated CRC testing histories for patients. Providing this information will support CRC screening among patients at average and high risk, follow-up of abnormal tests, and surveillance. Objectives and ApproachCalgary Laboratory Services, Colon Cancer Screening Centre, Alberta Cancer Registry, and endoscopy data were linked to create a comprehensive CRC screening history at the patient level. Based on screening histories and the current Clinical Practice Guideline, an algorithm was created to determine CRC screening statuses with the aim of providing accurate screening rates when linked to primary care provider patient panels. Results from the linkage are designed to be incorporated into clinic and EMR workflow processes to support adherence to evidence-based screening recommendations at the point of care. ResultsA comprehensive assessment of screening status was determined by integrating Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) and colonoscopy data. Among a sample cohort, patients were identified as being due for screening with FIT, requiring follow-up for a positive FIT test, or requiring appropriate surveillance for a positive-screen or abnormal colonoscopy findings. A summary report, actionable list, and resources were developed to convey findings. The summary report displayed CRC screening rates for a provider’s panel. The actionable list provided CRC screening statuses for each patient aged 40 to 84 indicating patients due for screening with FIT, for follow-up of positive FIT, or for surveillance colonoscopy. The resources were developed to support quality improvement for colorectal cancer screening for patients. Conclusion/ImplicationsThe data linkages and algorithm provide comprehensive CRC screening, follow-up, and surveillance information that could support guideline-adherent screening, increase screening rates, reduce duplication or unnecessary testing, and provide primary care providers with timely and robust information to support clinical decisions for individuals inside and outside of the target screening population.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
E L Tolma ◽  
S M Aljunid ◽  
M N Amrizal ◽  
J Longenecker ◽  
A Al-Basmy ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major public health issue in the Arab region. In Kuwait, CRC is the second most frequent cancer, with an age-standardized (world) incidence rate of 13.2 cases/100,000 in 2018. Despite the national efforts to promote CRC screening the current participation rate is very low (5 to 17%). Primary Care Providers (PCPs) are considered as the gatekeepers of cancer screening globally. This is one of the first studies in Kuwait that examined the current beliefs/practices of PCPs on CRC screening. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at governmental primary care centers in Kuwait from 2015-2017. Of 564 PCPs invited to participate from all centers, 255 completed the self-administered questionnaires. The 14-page survey contained 75 questions on PCPs’ beliefs and practices of CRC screening. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics. Results The study sample consisted primarily of females (52.0%) and non-Kuwaiti (79%) physicians, with mean age =43.3 (SD: 11.2) years. Most respondents (92%) believed that colonoscopy is the most effective screening tool. The majority (78%) reported that they recommend CRC screening to their patients, with colonoscopy as the most frequent modality (87%) followed by the Faecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) (52%). Around 40% of the respondents stated that they did not have time to discuss CRC screening with their patients. The majority (72%) believed that their patients did not complete their CRC screening tests. Health system related barriers included difficulties in obtaining test results from the gastroenterologist (61.4%), ordering follow-up test after a positive screening test (50.6%) and shortage of trained staff to conduct the screening test (44.2%). Conclusions A majority of PCPs in Kuwait recommend CRC screening to their patients, but not all patients follow through their recommendation. More research is needed to find out how to further enhance patient uptake of CRC screening. Key messages Colonoscopy is the most frequent screening CRC modality used in Kuwait. Health system related factors can be important future intervention targets to promote CRC screening.


Author(s):  
Sarah Stalder ◽  
Aimee Techau ◽  
Jenny Hamilton ◽  
Carlo Caballero ◽  
Mary Weber ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: The specific aims of this project were to create a fully integrated, nurse-led model of a psychiatric nurse practitioner and behavioral health care team within primary care to facilitate (1) patients receiving an appropriate level of care and (2) care team members performing at the top of their scope of practice. METHOD: The guiding model for process implementation was Rapid Cycle Quality Improvement. Three task forces were established to develop interventions in the areas of Roles and Responsibilities, Training and Implementation, and the electronic health record. INTERVENTION: The four interventions that emerged from these task forces were (1) the establishment of patient tiers based on diagnosis, medications, and risk assessment; (2) the creation of process maps to engage care team members; (3) just-in-time education regarding psychiatric medication management for primary care providers; and (4) use of a registry to track patients. RESULTS: The process measures of referrals to the psychiatric care team and psychiatric assessment intakes performed as expected. Both measures were higher at the onset of the project and lower 1 year later. The outcome indicator, number of case reviews, increased dramatically over time. CONCLUSIONS: For psychiatric nurse practitioners, this quality improvement effort provides evidence that a consultative role can be effective in supporting primary care providers. Through providing education, establishing patient tiers, and establishing an effective workflow, more patients may have access to psychiatric services.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey Ufholz ◽  
Amy Sheon ◽  
Daksh Bhargava ◽  
Goutham Rao

BACKGROUND Since the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine appointments have replaced many in-person healthcare visits [1 2]. However, older people are less likely to participate in telemedicine, preferring either in-person care or foregoing care altogether [3-6]. With a high prevalence of chronic conditions and vulnerability to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality through exposure to others in health care environments, (1-4), promoting telemedicine use should be a high priority for seniors. Seniors face significant barriers to participation in telemedicine, including lower internet and device access and skills, and visual, auditory, and tactile difficulties with telemedicine. OBJECTIVE Hoping to offer training to increase telemedicine use, we undertook a quality improvement survey to identify barriers to, and facilitators of telemedicine among seniors presenting to an outpatient family medicine teaching clinic which serves predominantly African American, economically disadvantaged adults with chronic illness in Cleveland, Ohio. METHODS Our survey, designated by the IRB as quality improvement, was designed based on a review of the literature, and input from our primary care providers and a digital equity expert (Figure 1). To minimize patient burden, the survey was limited to 10 questions. Because we were interested in technology barriers, data were collected on paper rather than a tablet or computer, with a research assistant available to read the survey questions. Patients presenting with needs that could be accomplished remotely were approached by a research assistant to complete the survey starting February 2021 until we reached the pre-determined sample size (N=30) in June 2021. Patients with known dementia, those who normally resident in a long-term care facility, and those presenting with an acute condition (e.g. fall or COPD exacerbation) were ineligible. Because of the small number of respondents, only univariate and bivariate tabulations were performed, in Excel. RESULTS 83% of respondents said they had devices that could be used for a telemedicine visit and that they went on the internet, but just 23% had had telemedicine visits. Few patients had advanced devices (iPhones, desktops, laptops or tablets); 46% had only a single device that was not IOS based mobile (Table 1). All participants with devices said they used them for “messaging on the internet,” but this was the only function used by 40%. No one used the internet for banking, shopping, and few used internet functions commonly needed for telemedicine (23.3% had email; 30% did video calling) (Table 1). 23.3% of respondents had had a telemedicine appointment. Many reported a loss of connection to their doctor as a concern. Participants who owned a computer or iPhone used their devices for a broader range of tasks, (Table 2 and 3), were aged 65-70 (Table 4), and were more likely to have had a telemedicine visit and to have more favorable views of telemedicine (Table 2). Respondents who had not had a telemedicine appointment endorsed a greater number of telemedicine disadvantages and endorsed less interest in future appointments (Table 2). Respondents who did not own an internet-capable device did not report using any internet functions and none had had a telemedicine appointment (Table 2). CONCLUSIONS This small survey revealed significant gaps in telemedicine readiness among seniors who said they had devices that could be used for telemedicine and that they went online themselves. No patients used key internet functions needed for staying safe during COVID, and few used internet applications that required skills needed for telemedicine. Few patients had devices that are optimal for seniors using telemedicine. Patients with more advanced devices used more internet functions and had more telemedicine experience and more favorable attitudes than others. Our results confirm previous studies [7-9] showing generally lower technological proficiency among older adults and some concerns about participating in telemedicine. However, our study is novel in pointing to subtle dimensions of telemedicine readiness that warrant further study—device capacity and use of internet in ways that build skills needed for telemedicine such as email and video calling. Before training seniors to use telemedicine, it’s important to ensure that they have the devices, basic digital skills and connectivity needed for telemedicine. Larger studies are needed to confirm our results and apply multivariate analysis to understand the relationships among age, device quality, internet skills and telemedicine attitudes. Development of validated scales of telemedicine readiness and telemedicine training to complement in-person care can help health systems offer precision-matched interventions to address barriers, facilitate increased adoption, and generally improve patients’ overall access to primary care and engagement with their primary care provider.


2013 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 272-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús López-Torres Hidalgo ◽  
M.ª José Simarro-Herráez ◽  
Joseba Rabanales-Sotos ◽  
Ramona Campos-Rosa ◽  
Belén de la-Ossa-Sendra ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 635-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Salz ◽  
K. C. Oeffinger ◽  
P. R. Lewis ◽  
R. L. Williams ◽  
R. L. Rhyne ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Diaz ◽  
Teresa Slomka

Although colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, the burden of this disease could be dramatically reduced by increased utilization of screening. Evidence-based recommendations and guidelines from national societies recommend screening all average risk adults starting at age 50 years. However, the myriad screening options and slight differences in screening recommendations between guidelines may lead to confusion among patients and their primary care providers. In addition, varied colorectal cancer incidence and screening rates among different racial/ethnic groups, inconsistent screening recommendations based on family history and/or age, and increasing awareness of the role of nonadenomatous and nonpolypoid lesions also pose potential challenges to primary care providers when counseling patients. The goal of this review, therefore, is to briefly summarize the colorectal cancer screening guidelines issued by 3 major organizations, compare their recommendations, and address emerging issues in colorectal cancer screening.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document