Rates and correlates of potentially inappropriate colorectal cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening procedures can inflate healthcare costs and increase medical risk. Little is known about the prevalence or causes of inappropriate CRC screening. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate CRC screening, and its association with patient and facility characteristics in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) . DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of all VHA patients aged 50 years and older who completed a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or a screening colonoscopy between 1 October 2009 and 31 December 2011 (n = 1,083,965). MAIN MEASURES: Measures included: proportion of patients whose test was classified as potentially inappropriate; associations between potentially inappropriate screening and patient demographic and health characteristics, facility complexity, CRC screening rates, dependence on FOBT, and CRC clinical reminder attributes. KEY RESULTS: Of 901,292 FOBT cases, 26.1 % were potentially inappropriate (13.9 % not due, 7.8 % limited life expectancy, 11.0 % receiving FOBT when colonoscopy was indicated). Of 134,335 screening colonoscopies, 14.2 % were potentially inappropriate (10.4 % not due, 4.4 % limited life expectancy). Each additional 10 years of patient age was associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing potentially inappropriate screening (ORs = 1.60 to 1.83 depending on screening mode). Compared to facilities scoring in the bottom third on a measure of reliance on FOBT (versus screening colonoscopy), facilities scoring in the top third were less likely to conduct potentially inappropriate FOBTs (OR = 0.,78) but more likely to conduct potentially inappropriate colonoscopies (OR = 2.20). Potentially inappropriate colonoscopies were less likely to be conducted at facilities where primary care providers were assigned partial responsibility (OR = 0.74) or full responsibility (OR = 0.73) for completing the CRC clinical reminder. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of VHA CRC screening tests are potentially inappropriate. Establishing processes that enforce appropriate screening intervals, triage patients with limited life expectancies, and discourage the use of FOBTs when a colonoscopy is indicated may reduce inappropriate testing.

Adding Postal Follow-Up to a Web-Based Survey of Primary Care and Gastroenterology Clinic Physician Chiefs Improved Response Rates but not Response Quality or Representativeness.

This study assessed whether postal follow-up to a web-based physician survey improves response rates, response quality, and representativeness. We recruited primary care and gastroenterology chiefs at 125 Veterans Affairs medical facilities to complete a 10-min web-based survey on colorectal cancer screening and diagnostic practices in 2010. We compared response rates, response errors, and representativeness in the primary care and gastroenterology samples before and after adding postal follow-up. Adding postal follow-up increased response rates by 20-25 percentage points; markedly greater increases than predicted from a third e-mail reminder. In the gastroenterology sample, the mean number of response errors made by web responders (0.25) was significantly smaller than the mean number made by postal responders (2.18), and web responders provided significantly longer responses to open-ended questions. There were no significant differences in these outcomes in the primary care sample. Adequate representativeness was achieved before postal follow-up in both samples, as indicated by the lack of significant differences between web responders and the recruitment population on facility characteristics. We conclude adding postal follow-up to this web-based physician leader survey improved response rates but not response quality or representativeness.

More than a score: a qualitative study of ancillary benefits of performance measurement.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has examined clinical effects of performance measurement systems. To the extent that non-clinical effects have been researched, the focus has been on negative unintended consequences. Yet, these same systems may also have ancillary benefits for patients and providers--that is, benefits that extend beyond improvements on clinical measures. The purpose of this study is to identify and describe potential ancillary benefits of performance measures as perceived by primary care staff and facility leaders in a large US healthcare system. METHODS: In-person individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 59 primary care staff and facility leaders at four Veterans Health Administration facilities. Transcribed interviews were coded and organised into thematic categories. RESULTS: Interviewed staff observed that local performance measurement implementation practices can result in increased patient knowledge and motivation. These effects on patients can lead to improved performance scores and additional ancillary benefits. Performance measurement implementation can also directly result in ancillary benefits for the patients and providers. Patients may experience greater satisfaction with care and psychosocial benefits associated with increased provider-patient communication. Ancillary benefits of performance measurement for providers include increased pride in individual or organisational performance and greater confidence that one's practice is grounded in evidence-based medicine. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive understanding of the effects of performance measurement systems needs to incorporate ancillary benefits as well as effects on clinical performance scores and negative unintended consequences. Although clinical performance has been the focus of most evaluations of performance measurement to date, both patient care and provider satisfaction may improve more rapidly if all three categories of effects are considered when designing and evaluating performance measurement systems.

Levels and variation in overuse of fecal occult blood testing in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Policy-makers have called for efforts to reduce overuse of cancer screening tests, including colorectal cancer screening (CRCS). Overuse of CRCS tests other than colonoscopy has not been well documented. OBJECTIVE: To estimate levels and correlates of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) overuse in a national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) sample. DESIGN: Observational PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 1,844 CRCS-eligible patients who responded to a 2007 CRCS survey conducted in 24 VHA facilities and had one or more FOBTs between 2003 and 2009. MAIN MEASURES: We combined survey data on race, education, and income with administrative data on region, age, gender, CRCS procedures, and outpatient visits to estimate overuse levels and variation. We coded FOBTs as overused if they were conducted <10 months after prior FOBT, <9.5 years after prior colonoscopy, or <4.5 years after prior barium enema. We used multinomial logistic regression models to examine variation in overuse by reason (sooner than recommended after prior FOBT; sooner than recommended after colonoscopy, barium enema, or a combination of procedures), adjusting for clustering of procedures within patients, and patients within facilities. KEY RESULTS: Of 4,236 FOBTs received by participants, 885 (21 %) met overuse criteria, with 323 (8 %) sooner than recommended after FOBT, and 562 (13 %) sooner than recommended after other procedures. FOBT overuse varied across facilities (9-32 %, p<0.0001) and region (12-23 %, p< .0012). FOBT overuse after prior FOBT declined between 2003 and 2009 (8 %-5 %, p= .0492), but overuse after other procedures increased (11-19 %, p= .0002). FOBT overuse of both types increased with number of outpatient visits (OR 1.15, p<0.001), but did not vary by patient demographics. More than 11 % of overused FOBTs were followed by colonoscopy within 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Many FOBTs are performed sooner than recommended in the VHA. Variation in overuse by facility, region, and outpatient visits suggests addressing FOBT overuse will require system-level solutions.

Unintended consequences of implementing a national performance measurement system into local practice.

BACKGROUND: Although benefits of performance measurement (PM) systems have been well documented, there is little research on negative unintended consequences of performance measurement systems in primary care. To optimize PM systems, a better understanding is needed of the types of negative unintended consequences that occur and of their causal antecedents. OBJECTIVES: (1) Identify unintended negative consequences of PM systems for patients. (2) Develop a conceptual framework of hypothesized relationships between PM systems, facility-level variables (local implementation strategies, primary care staff attitudes and behaviors), and unintended negative effects on patients. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, APPROACH: Qualitative study design using dissimilar cases sampling. A series of 59 in-person individual semi-structured interviews at four Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities was conducted between February and July 2009. Participants included members of primary care staff and facility leaders. Sites were selected to assure variability in the number of veterans served and facility scores on national VHA performance measures. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and content coded to identify thematic categories and relationships. RESULTS: Participants noted both positive effects and negative unintended consequences of PM. We report three negative unintended consequences for patients. Performance measurement can (1) lead to inappropriate clinical care, (2) decrease provider focus on patient concerns and patient service, and (3) compromise patient education and autonomy. We also illustrate examples of negative consequences on primary care team dynamics. In many instances these problems originate from local implementation strategies developed in response to national PM definitions and policies. CONCLUSIONS: Facility-level strategies undertaken to implement national PM systems may result in inappropriate clinical care, can distract providers from patient concerns, and may have a negative effect on patient education and autonomy. Further research is needed to ascertain how features of centralized PM systems influence whether measures are translated locally by facilities into more or less patient-centered policies and processes.

The interrelationships between and contributions of background, cognitive, and environmental factors to colorectal cancer screening adherence.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the interrelationships between and contributions of background, cognitive, and environmental factors to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence. METHODS: In this study, 2,416 average risk patients aged 50-75 from 24 Veterans Affairs medical facilities responded to a mailed survey with phone follow-up (response rate 81%). Survey data (attitudes, behaviors, demographics) were linked to facility (organizational complexity) and medical records data (diagnoses, screening history). Patients with a fecal occult blood test within 15 months, sigmoidoscopy or barium enema within 5.5 years, or colonoscopy within 11 years of the survey were considered adherent. Logistic regressions estimated the association between adherence and background, cognitive, and environmental factors. Deviance ratios examined interrelationships between factors. Population attributable risks (PAR) were used to identify intervention targets. RESULTS: The association of background factors with adherence was partially explained by cognitive and environmental factors. The association of environmental factors with adherence was partially explained by cognitive factors. Cognitive and environmental factors contributed equally to adherence. Factors with the highest PARs for non-adherence were age 50-64, less than two comorbidities, and lack of physician recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to increase physician screening recommendations for younger, healthy patients at facilities with the lowest screening rates may improve CRC adherence in this setting.

Are gender differences in colorectal cancer screening rates due to differences in self-reporting?

OBJECTIVE: Studies have found that women are less likely than men to undergo colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. While one source of these disparities may be gender differences in barriers and facilitators to screening, another may be differences in reporting bias. METHOD: In this study of 345 male and female veterans, conducted in 2006 in Minneapolis, MN, we examined CRC screening adherence rates by gender using medical records and self-report and assessed whether any differences were due to reporting bias. RESULTS: We found a significantly higher rate of colonoscopy use among men when using self-report data, but no significant differences in either overall or test-specific screening adherence when using medical record data. Analyses examining the prevalence and determinants of concordance between self-report and medical records screening revealed that compared to women, men were less accurate in reporting sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy and over-reported screening by colonoscopy. Men were also more likely to have missing self-report data and how missing data were handled affected differences in screening behavior. Accuracy in screening behavior was not explained by demographic variables, good physical or mental health, or physician recommendation for screening. CONCLUSIONS: Reported gender disparities in CRC screening adherence may be a result of reporting bias.

Randomized trial showed requesting medical records with a survey produced a more representative sample than requesting separately.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to compare the effect of two approaches to requesting medical records on survey response rates, sample representativeness, and the quality of self-reported screening. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Eight hundred ninety veterans aged 50-75 years from the Minneapolis VA Medical Center were randomly assigned to (1) records request included with a colorectal cancer screening survey ("with-survey" group) or (2) request in a separate mailing following a completed survey ("after-survey" group). Analyses compared response rates, the proportion and characteristics of patients providing records, and the validity of self-reported screening, by group. RESULTS: Response rates did not vary by group (with-survey 76%; after-survey 78%, P=0.45). 54% of with-survey and 47% of after-survey participants provided complete medical records (P = 0.06). In the with-survey group, patients with complete medical records were significantly more likely to be married and to have a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder; in the after-survey group, they were more likely to be aged 65-75 years, Caucasian, to have a family history of colorectal cancer, and to report being screened. Validity of self-reported screening did not vary significantly by group. CONCLUSION: The with-survey approach did not significantly reduce response rates or the quality of self-reported screening and produced a higher number and more representative sample with complete records.

Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behavior from a mixed-mode survey of veterans.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to validate self-reported colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using the National Cancer Institute Colorectal Cancer Screening questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 890 patients, ages 50 to 75 years, from the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center were surveyed by mail. Phone administration was attempted with mail nonresponders. VA and non-VA records were combined for the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, concordance, and report-to-records ratio (R2R) were estimated for overall and test-specific CRC adherence among respondents providing complete medical records. Secondary analyses examined variation in estimates by patient characteristics, treatment of missing and uncertain responses, and whether a strict or liberal time interval was used for assessing concordance. RESULTS: Complete medical records were available for 345 of the 686 survey responders. For overall adherence, sensitivity was 0.98, specificity was 0.59, concordance was 0.88, and R2R was 1.14. Sensitivity was 0.82 for fecal occult blood test (FOBT), 0.75 for sigmoidoscopy, 0.97 for colonoscopy, and 0.63 for double-contrast barium enema (DCBE). Specificity was 0.89 for FOBT, 0.76 for sigmoidoscopy, 0.72 for colonoscopy, and 0.85 for DCBE. Concordance was >0.80 for all tests other than sigmoidoscopy (0.76). R2R was 1.31 for FOBT, 1.33 for sigmoidoscopy, 1.42 for colonoscopy, and 6.13 for DCBE. The R2R was lower for a combined sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy measure. Overreporting was more pronounced for older, less-educated individuals with no family history of CRC. Sensitivity and R2R improved using a liberal interval and treating uncertain responses as nonadherent (versus missing), but differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported CRC screening validity is generally acceptable and robust across definitional decisions, but varies by screening test and patient characteristics.

Spontaneous reports of emotional upset and health care utilization among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder after receiving a potentially upsetting survey.

This study assessed the effects of a potentially distressing mailed survey on the emotional well-being and health care utilization (HCU) of 4,918 male and female veterans who applied for posttraumatic stress disorder disability benefits. Content analysis of spontaneous comments, in combination with analysis of subjects' HCU before and after receipt of the survey, suggested that spontaneously disclosed episodes of emotional upset were rare. In general, surveyed veterans' HCU decreased after receipt of the survey.