Screening for skin cancer.

CONTEXT: Malignant melanoma is often lethal, and its incidence in the United States has increased rapidly over the past 2 decades. Nonmelanoma skin cancer is seldom lethal, but, if advanced, can cause severe disfigurement and morbidity. Early detection and treatment of melanoma might reduce mortality, while early detection and treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer might prevent major disfigurement and to a lesser extent prevent mortality. Current recommendations from professional societies regarding screening for skin cancer vary. OBJECTIVE: To examine published data on the effectiveness of routine screening for skin cancer by a primary care provider, as part of an assessment for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. DATA SOURCES: We searched the MEDLINE database for papers published between 1994 and June 1999, using search terms for screening, physical examination, morbidity, and skin neoplasms. For information on accuracy of screening tests, we used the search terms sensitivity and specificity. We identified the most important studies from before 1994 from the Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, second edition, and from high-quality reviews. We used reference lists and expert recommendations to locate additional articles. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently reviewed a subset of 500 abstracts. Once consistency was established, the remainder were reviewed by one reviewer. We included studies if they contained data on yield of screening, screening tests, risk factors, risk assessment, effectiveness of early detection, or cost effectiveness. DATA EXTRACTION: We abstracted the following descriptive information from full-text published studies of screening and recorded it in an electronic database: type of screening study, study design, setting, population, patient recruitment, screening test description, examiner, advertising targeted at high-risk groups or not targeted, reported risk factors of participants, and procedure for referrals. We also abstracted the yield of screening data including probabilities and numbers of referrals, types of suspected skin cancers, biopsies, confirmed skin cancers, and stages and thickness of skin cancers. For studies that reported test performance, we recorded the definition of a suspicious lesion, the "gold-standard" determination of disease, and the number of true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative test results. When possible, positive predictive values, likelihood ratios, sensitivity, and specificity were recorded. DATA SYNTHESIS: No randomized or case-control studies have been done that demonstrate that routine screening for melanoma by primary care providers reduces morbidity or mortality. Basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma are very common, but detection and treatment in the absence of formal screening are almost always curative. No controlled studies have shown that formal screening programs will improve this already high cure rate. While the efficacy of screening has not been established, the screening procedures themselves are noninvasive, and the follow-up test, skin biopsy, has low morbidity. Five studies from mass screening programs reported the accuracy of skin examination as a screening test. One of these, a prospective study, tracked patients with negative results to determine the number of patients with false-negative results. In this study, the sensitivity of screening for skin cancer was 94% and specificity was 98%. Several recent case-control studies confirm earlier evidence that risk of melanoma rises with the presence of atypical moles and/or many common moles. One well-done prospective study demonstrated that risk assessment by limited physical exam identified a relatively small (<10%) group of primary care patients for more thorough evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the evidence addressing the accuracy of routine screening by primary care providers for early detection of melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer ranged from poor to fair. We found no studies that assessed the effectiveness of periodic skin examination by a clinician in reducing melanoma mortality. Both self-assessment of risk factors or clinician examination can classify a small proportion of patients as at highest risk for melanoma. Skin cancer screening, perhaps using a risk-assessment technique to identify high-risk patients who are seeing a physician for other reasons, merits additional study as a strategy to address the excess burden of disease in older adults.

Preventive dentistry: practitioners' recommendations for low-risk patients compared with scientific evidence and practice guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this article is to compare published evidence supporting procedures to prevent dental caries and periodontal disease, in low-risk patients, with the actual preventive recommendations of practicing dentists. METHODS: Methods included (1) a survey questionnaire of general dentists practicing in western New York State concerning the preventive procedures they would recommend and at what intervals for low-risk children, young adults, and older adults; and (2) review of the published, English-language literature for evidence supporting preventive dental interventions. RESULTS: The majority of dentists surveyed recommended semiannual visits for visual examination and probing to detect caries (73% to 79%), and scaling and polishing to prevent periodontal disease (83% to 86%) for low-risk patients of all ages. Bite-wing radiographs were recommended for all age groups at annual or semiannual intervals. In-office fluoride applications were recommended for low-risk children at intervals of 6 to 12 months by 73% of dentists but were recommended for low-risk older persons by only 22% of dentists. Application of sealants to prevent pit and fissure caries was recommended for low-risk children by 22% of dentists. Literature review found no studies comparing different frequencies of dental examinations and bite-wing radiographs to determine the optimal screening interval in low-risk patients. Two studies of the effect of scaling and polishing on the prevention of periodontal disease found no benefit from more frequent than annual treatments. Although fluoride is clearly a major reason for the decline in the prevalence of dental caries, there are no studies of the incremental benefit of in-office fluoride treatments for low-risk patients exposed to fluoridated water and using fluoridated toothpaste. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative studies using outcome end points are needed to determine the optimal frequency of dental examinations and bite-wing radiographs for the early detection of caries, and of scaling and polishing to prevent periodontal disease in low-risk persons. There is no scientific evidence that dental examinations, including scaling and polishing, at 6 month intervals, as recommended by the dentists surveyed in this study, is superior to annual or less frequent examinations for low-risk populations. There is also no evidence that in-office fluoride applications offer incremental benefit over less costly methods of delivering fluoride for low-risk populations.

After the grant runs out. Long-term provider health maintenance compliance using a computer-based tracking system.

OBJECTIVE: To measure long-term provider (physicians and physician's assistants) health maintenance compliance 4 years after the completion of a grant-funded project to improve provider compliance by using a computer-based health maintenance tracking system. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of provider health maintenance compliance for patients receiving computer-based health maintenance tracking in 1992 and 1996. SETTING: Rural, multiple-office, nonprofit, fee-for-service family practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall provider compliance with the common elements of the health maintenance protocols in 1992 and 1996. Provider compliance with specific, individual preventive interventions was compared. RESULTS: Overall provider compliance was 83% in 1996, compared with 80% in 1992. This difference was statistically significant (P = .05) but not clinically significant. Provider compliance was significantly higher in 1996 for 3 procedures: blood pressure determination, tetanus-diphtheria immunization, and weight. It was unchanged for 5 procedures: clinical breast examination, mammography, Papanicolaou smears, cholesterol determination, and fecal occult blood testing for colon cancer. Provider compliance with obtaining a history of tobacco use declined. CONCLUSION: Improvements in provider health maintenance compliance associated with installation of a computer-based health maintenance tracking system were maintained 4 years after cessation of the formal research intervention.

Use of colchicine to treat severe constipation in developmentally disabled patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe developmental disabilities often have concurrent decreased neuromuscular tone of the gastrointestinal tract, which can lead to a weak gag reflex, esophageal reflux, aspiration, and severe intractable constipation. High doses of multiple laxatives are frequently needed to maintain bowel motility in these patients. Colchicine, a natural alkaloid that is primarily used for the treatment of acute attacks of gout, causes an increase in gastrointestinal motility by neurogenic stimulation. The purpose of this study was to determine whether daily colchicine administration can improve bowel function and reduce laxative use in profoundly disabled patients with severe, intractable constipation who currently require large doses of multiple laxatives. METHODS: Twelve developmentally disabled patients who required three or more different laxatives to manage their chronic constipation were selected to participate in a double-blind, crossover study. Eleven patients who completed the study received placebo treatment for 8 weeks and colchicine treatment for 8 weeks. The total number of bowel movements and the total number of laxatives used during each of the two 8-week periods were compared. RESULTS: Eight of 11 patients experienced an improved bowel pattern while on colchicine compared with placebo, as defined by an increase in total number of bowel movements or a decrease in total number of rectal laxatives used. No clinically important complications were related to use of colchicine. CONCLUSIONS: Colchicine appears to be a valuable adjunct in the management of severe intractable constipation. Larger, long-term studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Determinants of cancer screening frequency: the example of screening for cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening frequency should be based on the rate of progression of the disease and the sensitivity of the screening test. A common misconception is that a person's risk of getting the disease determines how often they should be screened. METHODS: We describe algebraically the theoretical interaction of disease progression rate and screening test sensitivity determining the portion of invasive cancers prevented by screening. After discussing the assumptions and limitations of the model, we apply this model to the example of screening for cervical cancer. Actual data from large screening programs assembled by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) are used to test the assumptions of the model. RESULTS: A simple formula can express the relation between disease progression rate, sensitivity of the screening test, screening frequency, and screening error. Disease prevalence does not figure in this equation. The IARC data suggest that, at least for cervical cancer, as screening frequency increases, incremental sensitivity of the test decreases or remaining undetected cases progress more rapidly so that anticipated benefits from more frequent screening are not realized. CONCLUSIONS: Rate of disease progression and sensitivity of the screening test are the proper determinants of cancer screening frequency. Because these factors can vary depending on screening frequency, however, the optimal screening interval for a particular cancer must be determined by clinical trials.

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: highlights of the 1996 report.

The recent report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is a compendium of the scientific evidence supporting clinical preventive services that might be offered by primary care physicians. Pediatric recommendations include height, weight and blood pressure measurements, neonatal screening for hemoglobinopathies and counseling about injury prevention, diet and exercise, sexual behavior, substance abuse and dental health. Lead screening is recommended in communities with a high prevalence of elevated lead levels. Adult recommendations include measurement of blood pressure and weight, selective screening for elevated total cholesterol level, screening persons over age 50 for colorectal cancer, screening women for cervical cancer at least every three years, and screening women 50 to 69 years of age for breast cancer with mammography every one to two years. Counseling patients about substance abuse, diet and exercise, injury prevention, sexual behavior and dental health is recommended. Women of childbearing age should receive folic acid supplementation to prevent neural tube defects if they should become pregnant. Multiple marker testing is recommended for women over age 35 to screen for Down syndrome. Immunization recommendations are similar to those of other national groups.

Cancer occurrence and screening in family practice. A 20-year experience.

BACKGROUND: This article is a sequel to a previously published article describing the occurrence of cancer in a rural family practice and the contribution of screening to the diagnosis of breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer. Together, the two articles describe a 20-year family practice experience in diagnosing and screening for cancer. METHODS: The study is a retrospective chart review of all cancers diagnosed in a family practice from January 1985 through December 1994. Records of a regional tumor registry were reviewed to validate and ensure completeness of the cancer diagnoses. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one cancers were identified during the 10-year study period in a population of approximately 4000 patients. Screening by fecal occult blood testing identified 11 of 20 colorectal cancers, mammography and physician examination identified 9 of 12 breast cancers, and a program of biannual Papanicolaou smears resulted in the diagnosis of 3 of 3 cervical cancers. Only 3 melanomas, 3 ovarian cancers, and 1 testicular cancer were diagnosed in this practice during the entire 20 years of the combined studies. CONCLUSIONS: The five most common cancers--skin, colorectal, lung, breast, and prostate--accounted for 71% of the cancers diagnosed. A high rate of provider and patient compliance with screening was achieved. Screening detected a majority of breast and colorectal cancers. Annual Papanicolaou smear screening would have provided no incremental benefit over the biannual screening used in this practice.

Computerized health maintenance tracking systems: a clinician's guide to necessary and optional features. A report from the American Cancer Society Advisory Group on Preventive Health Care Reminder Systems.

BACKGROUND: To promote preventive health care by primary care physicians and the development of computerized health maintenance tracking systems, the American Cancer Society sponsored an expert advisory group to define necessary and desirable, but optional features of computer-based health maintenance tracking software for use in primary care practice. METHODS: Systematic literature review and structured consensus development were followed by independent expert critique. RESULTS: Necessary input features include a comprehensive, practice-specific health maintenance protocol, multiple entry codes to indicate the current status of each procedure, and a mechanism for patient-specific exclusion or alteration of procedure frequency. Necessary features of the information management system include a linkage to a demographic data system, optional tracking of all or selected patients, identification of each patient's primary provider, and the ability to provide either a paper or electronic interface for the provider. Necessary outputs include provider reminders, patient reminders sent regularly regardless of visit status, and summary reports of provider and patient compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ideal computer-based health maintenance tracking system is still evolving, knowledge of these necessary and optional features can aid clinicians interested in buying or developing a system for their own practice.

Computer-based vs manual health maintenance tracking. A controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare computer-based with manual health maintenance tracking systems to determine whether (1) a computer-based system will result in better provider compliance with the practice health maintenance protocol, (2) the incremental cost of operating a computer-based vs a manual health maintenance tracking system differs, and (3) inactive patients will respond to health maintenance reminders. DESIGN: Two-year prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Rural, multiple-office, nonprofit, fee-for-service family practice. PATIENTS: Adult members of families in which at least one member had been seen by the practice within the past 2 years. INTERVENTION: A computer-based health maintenance tracking system that generated annual provider and patient reminders for all patients regardless of appointment status compared with a manual flowchart-based tracking system in which patient reminders were triggered by provider request. OUTCOME MEASURES: Provider compliance with the health maintenance protocol determined by preintervention and postintervention chart audits, costs of computer-based tracking, and response of inactive patients to health maintenance reminders. RESULTS: Overall provider compliance with the health maintenance protocol increased 15 percentage points in the computer-based tracking group and four percentage points in the manual group. The computer-based tracking group had significantly higher provider compliance than the manual group for eight of 11 procedures. The computer-based tracking system cost 78 cents per patient per year to operate. It was not associated with increased office visits or patient billings. CONCLUSIONS: Computer-based health maintenance tracking improved provider health maintenance compliance compared with a manual system. The finding that health maintenance compliance improved without a significant increase in patient visits or billings requires confirmation in other settings but suggests that considerable health maintenance can be incorporated into ongoing patient care.

An international perspective on the cholesterol debate.

For the past 5 years there has been an intensive debate and a number of conflicting guidelines suggesting what general practitioners (GPs) should do to screen and manage hyperlipidaemia. At a WONCA seminar in Vancouver in 1992, policies and guidelines from Canada, the UK, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Hong Kong and the USA were reviewed. It was concluded that cholesterol policy and guidelines tend to be influenced more by political and economic factors than by evidence of health benefit. International guidelines for cholesterol screening and management would be of minimal value, as GPs would have to interpret the epidemiological evidence of benefit from lipid screening and lipid lowering strategy in the context of each patient to arrive at optimum management.

Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men ages 60 to 80 years. A cost-effectiveness analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening by physical examination or abdominal ultrasonography for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in men aged 60 to 80 years. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of the pertinent literature by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination, augmented by an additional computerized search (MEDLINE) and references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles. Several experts reviewed the data for completeness. STUDY SELECTION: Published English-language studies that present data relevant to screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm. DATA EXTRACTION: Several reviewers determined a range of data and the most probable value for each parameter. DATA SYNTHESIS: A computer spreadsheet model was constructed to simulate the costs and effectiveness of various screening protocols in a cohort of 10,000 men during a period of 20 years. The primary cost-effectiveness measure computed was incremental present-value dollar expenditures for screening and treatment per incremental present-value life-year saved by the screening program. Using the "most probable" values for the simulation parameters, a single screening procedure of abdominal palpation followed by abdominal ultrasound scan for patients with positive screening results is estimated to gain 20 life-years at a cost of $28,741 per life-year. A single ultrasound screen gains 57 life-years at a cost of $41,550 per life-year. A repeated ultrasound screen after 5 years gains 1 additional life-year at a cost of $906,769. CONCLUSIONS: A single screen for AAA by abdominal palpation in men from age 60 to 80 years might be considered cost-effective but of small benefit. A single screen with ultrasonography is at the high end of the cost-per-life-year range that might be considered cost-effective and also is of modest benefit. Repeated screening is not cost-effective.