User login
the developers said.
As part of their work, the researchers conducted a retrospective study of 20,581 adults aged 50-75 years from 38 health systems that showed that fewer than half (48%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within 180 days of an initial abnormal SBT for CRC.
“The low follow-up rates to an abnormal SBT were initially surprising,” first author Elizabeth L. Ciemins, PhD, MPH, MA, Research and Analytics, American Medical Group Association (AMGA), Alexandria, Virginia, told this news organization.
“However, once we interviewed clinicians and learned that this was not a measure they were tracking, along with their own incorrect assumptions of a much higher follow-up rate, the low rates made sense. As is commonly said, ‘you can’t change what you don’t measure,’” she said.
The CRC screening completion measure the researchers propose “builds on and addresses an important shortcoming in an existing measure and will help ensure complete screening for CRC,” they noted in their JAMA Network Open paper.
The key elements of the follow-up measure are the date and result of a SBT and the date of the follow-up colonoscopy — if it occurred, Dr. Ciemins explained.
“Currently, health systems are not consistently tracking this measure, but they have the data elements to do so, especially if they are doing colonoscopies in-house,” she said.
Field testing showed that use of this new measure is “feasible, valid, and reliable,” the authors said. Dr. Ciemins believed this CRC screening completion measure could be widely implemented.
“Three AMGA member health systems feasibility tested the data elements and found that they could reliably abstract the required elements from electronic health records (EHRs),” she told this news organization.
The researchers are currently testing the measure among 20 AMGA member health systems, that are submitting quarterly data on a version of the specified measure.
“Advancing this measure as a quality performance measure could significantly increase the early detection of CRC, thereby improving health and ultimately saving lives,” the authors concluded in their paper.
The Right Direction, But Questions Remain
The coauthors of a linked commentary said this research highlights the “suboptimal” rates of a timely follow-up colonoscopy after positive SBT results. They applauded the authors for “focusing attention on a meaningful approach to measuring high-quality CRC screening and providing guidance for standardized measurement.”
However, several questions arise from this study, “including whether 6 months is the ideal interval for colonoscopy completion after a positive SBT result, where this measure fits in the context of existing CRC screening measures, and how to implement it in practice,” Jennifer K. Maratt, MD, with Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, and coauthors wrote.
“This measure alone does not address all the gaps in the screening process, nor does it address barriers to colonoscopy completion, but it points us in the right direction for measuring the success of screening programs,” Dr. Maratt and her colleagues added.
The study was supported by a grant from the AARP. The authors and editorial writers had no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
the developers said.
As part of their work, the researchers conducted a retrospective study of 20,581 adults aged 50-75 years from 38 health systems that showed that fewer than half (48%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within 180 days of an initial abnormal SBT for CRC.
“The low follow-up rates to an abnormal SBT were initially surprising,” first author Elizabeth L. Ciemins, PhD, MPH, MA, Research and Analytics, American Medical Group Association (AMGA), Alexandria, Virginia, told this news organization.
“However, once we interviewed clinicians and learned that this was not a measure they were tracking, along with their own incorrect assumptions of a much higher follow-up rate, the low rates made sense. As is commonly said, ‘you can’t change what you don’t measure,’” she said.
The CRC screening completion measure the researchers propose “builds on and addresses an important shortcoming in an existing measure and will help ensure complete screening for CRC,” they noted in their JAMA Network Open paper.
The key elements of the follow-up measure are the date and result of a SBT and the date of the follow-up colonoscopy — if it occurred, Dr. Ciemins explained.
“Currently, health systems are not consistently tracking this measure, but they have the data elements to do so, especially if they are doing colonoscopies in-house,” she said.
Field testing showed that use of this new measure is “feasible, valid, and reliable,” the authors said. Dr. Ciemins believed this CRC screening completion measure could be widely implemented.
“Three AMGA member health systems feasibility tested the data elements and found that they could reliably abstract the required elements from electronic health records (EHRs),” she told this news organization.
The researchers are currently testing the measure among 20 AMGA member health systems, that are submitting quarterly data on a version of the specified measure.
“Advancing this measure as a quality performance measure could significantly increase the early detection of CRC, thereby improving health and ultimately saving lives,” the authors concluded in their paper.
The Right Direction, But Questions Remain
The coauthors of a linked commentary said this research highlights the “suboptimal” rates of a timely follow-up colonoscopy after positive SBT results. They applauded the authors for “focusing attention on a meaningful approach to measuring high-quality CRC screening and providing guidance for standardized measurement.”
However, several questions arise from this study, “including whether 6 months is the ideal interval for colonoscopy completion after a positive SBT result, where this measure fits in the context of existing CRC screening measures, and how to implement it in practice,” Jennifer K. Maratt, MD, with Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, and coauthors wrote.
“This measure alone does not address all the gaps in the screening process, nor does it address barriers to colonoscopy completion, but it points us in the right direction for measuring the success of screening programs,” Dr. Maratt and her colleagues added.
The study was supported by a grant from the AARP. The authors and editorial writers had no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
the developers said.
As part of their work, the researchers conducted a retrospective study of 20,581 adults aged 50-75 years from 38 health systems that showed that fewer than half (48%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within 180 days of an initial abnormal SBT for CRC.
“The low follow-up rates to an abnormal SBT were initially surprising,” first author Elizabeth L. Ciemins, PhD, MPH, MA, Research and Analytics, American Medical Group Association (AMGA), Alexandria, Virginia, told this news organization.
“However, once we interviewed clinicians and learned that this was not a measure they were tracking, along with their own incorrect assumptions of a much higher follow-up rate, the low rates made sense. As is commonly said, ‘you can’t change what you don’t measure,’” she said.
The CRC screening completion measure the researchers propose “builds on and addresses an important shortcoming in an existing measure and will help ensure complete screening for CRC,” they noted in their JAMA Network Open paper.
The key elements of the follow-up measure are the date and result of a SBT and the date of the follow-up colonoscopy — if it occurred, Dr. Ciemins explained.
“Currently, health systems are not consistently tracking this measure, but they have the data elements to do so, especially if they are doing colonoscopies in-house,” she said.
Field testing showed that use of this new measure is “feasible, valid, and reliable,” the authors said. Dr. Ciemins believed this CRC screening completion measure could be widely implemented.
“Three AMGA member health systems feasibility tested the data elements and found that they could reliably abstract the required elements from electronic health records (EHRs),” she told this news organization.
The researchers are currently testing the measure among 20 AMGA member health systems, that are submitting quarterly data on a version of the specified measure.
“Advancing this measure as a quality performance measure could significantly increase the early detection of CRC, thereby improving health and ultimately saving lives,” the authors concluded in their paper.
The Right Direction, But Questions Remain
The coauthors of a linked commentary said this research highlights the “suboptimal” rates of a timely follow-up colonoscopy after positive SBT results. They applauded the authors for “focusing attention on a meaningful approach to measuring high-quality CRC screening and providing guidance for standardized measurement.”
However, several questions arise from this study, “including whether 6 months is the ideal interval for colonoscopy completion after a positive SBT result, where this measure fits in the context of existing CRC screening measures, and how to implement it in practice,” Jennifer K. Maratt, MD, with Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, and coauthors wrote.
“This measure alone does not address all the gaps in the screening process, nor does it address barriers to colonoscopy completion, but it points us in the right direction for measuring the success of screening programs,” Dr. Maratt and her colleagues added.
The study was supported by a grant from the AARP. The authors and editorial writers had no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.