Search

Background: While electronic health records (EHRs) play a key role in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by identifying individuals who are overdue, important shortfalls remain., Objectives: As part of the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer (STOP CRC) study, we assessed the accuracy of EHR codes in identifying patients eligible for CRC screening., Methods: We selected a stratified random sample of 800 study participants from 26 participating clinics, in the Pacific Northwest region of the USA. We compared data obtained through codes in the EHR to conduct a manual chart audit. A trained chart abstractor completed the abstraction of eligible and ineligible patients., Results: Of 520 individuals in need of CRC screening, identified via the EHR, 459 were confirmed through chart review (positive predictive value = 88%). Of 280 individuals flagged as up-to-date in their screening per EHR data, 269 were confirmed through chart review (negative predictive value = 96%). Among the 61 patients incorrectly classified as eligible, 83.6% of disagreements were due to evidence of a prior colonoscopy or referral that was not captured in recognizable fields in the EHR., Conclusions: Our findings highlight importance of better capture of past screening events in the EHR. While the need for better population-based data is not unique to CRC screening, it provides an important example of the use of population-based data not only for tracking care, but also for delivering interventions., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Colorectal-cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States, and Latinos have particularly low rates of screening. Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) is a partnership among two research institutions and a network of safety net clinics to promote colorectal cancer screening among populations served by these clinics. This paper reports on results of a pilot study conducted in a safety net organization that serves primarily Latinos., Methods: The study assessed two clinic-based approaches to raise rates of colorectal-cancer screening among selected age-eligible patients not up-to-date with colorectal-cancer screening guidelines. One clinic each was assigned to: (1) an automated data-driven Electronic Health Record (EHR)-embedded program for mailing Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kits (Auto Intervention); or (2) a higher-intensity program consisting of a mailed FIT kit plus linguistically and culturally tailored interventions delivered at the clinic level (Auto Plus Intervention). A third clinic within the safety-net organization was selected to serve as a passive control (Usual Care). Two simple measurements of feasibility were: 1) ability to use real-time EHR data to identify patients eligible for each intervention step, and 2) ability to offer affordable testing and follow-up care for uninsured patients., Results: The study was successful at both measurements of feasibility. A total of 112 patients in the Auto clinic and 101 in the Auto Plus clinic met study inclusion criteria and were mailed an introductory letter. Reach was high for the mailed component (92.5% of kits were successfully mailed), and moderate for the telephone component (53% of calls were successful completed). After exclusions for invalid address and other factors, 206 (109 in the Auto clinic and 97 in the Auto Plus clinic) were mailed a FIT kit. At 6 months, fecal test completion rates were higher in the Auto (39.3%) and Auto Plus (36.6%) clinics compared to the usual-care clinic (1.1%)., Conclusions: Findings showed that the trial interventions delivered in a safety-net setting were both feasible and raised rates of colorectal-cancer screening, compared to usual care. Findings from this pilot will inform a larger pragmatic study involving multiple clinics., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01742065.

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) has been translated into digital formats. We report an economic evaluation of a digital DPP implemented in a large, integrated health care system. METHODS: Patients (n = 4148) were invited to participate in digital DPP based on clinical characteristics (HbA1c 5.7%-6.4% and body mass index = 30 kg/m2) assessed using electronic medical record data. Using a propensity score we matched (1:1) enrolled and not enrolled patients for a total of 784. We identified high-risk patients (ie, above the 50th percentile of risk; n = 202) by calculating each patient's 2-year of developing diabetes. We report the cost of the intervention and the costs of medical care over 12- and 24-month follow-up, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the cost per additional kilogram weight loss at 24 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, enrolled patients had lower total costs ($6,926, 95% CI $5,681-$8,171) than not enrolled patients ($7,538, 95% CI $6,293-$8,783). This pattern attenuated slightly at 24 months (enrolled = $16,255, 95% CI $14,097-$18,412; not enrolled = $16,688, 95% CI $14,531-$18,846). We found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $81.92 per additional kilogram weight loss. For high-risk patients, the digital DPP group had, on average, lower costs and greater weight loss. We found a 55% chance of the digital DPP program being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $150 per additional kilogram of weight loss; at the same willingness-to-pay, there is a 60% chance in the high-risk subgroup. Limitations include the nonrandomized design and potential volunteer bias. CONCLUSION: Digital DPP had a favorable cost-effectiveness profile compared to other lifestyle interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of a Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) in both in-person and digital health-care settings has been increasing. The purpose of this article is to describe the protocol of a mixed-methods, natural experiment study designed to evaluate the implementation of DPP in a large, integrated health system. METHODS: Kaiser Permanente Northwest patients who were 19 to 75 years with prediabetes (hemoglobin A1c or glycated hemoglobin, 5.7-6.4) and obesity (body mass index = 30 kg/m2) were invited, via the Kaiser Permanente Northwest patient portal, to participate in the digital (n = 4124) and in-person (n = 2669) DPP during 2016 through 2018. Primary (weight) and secondary (hemoglobin A1c or glycated hemoglobin level) outcome data will be obtained from electronic health records. A cost-effectiveness analysis as well as qualitative interviews with patients (enrolled and not enrolled in the DPP) and stakeholders will be conducted to examine further implementation, acceptability, and sustainability. CONCLUSION: The mixed-methods, natural experiment design we will use to evaluate Kaiser Permanente Northwest's implementation of the digital and in-person DPP builds on existing evidence related to the effectiveness of these two DPP delivery modes and will contribute new knowledge related to best practices for implementing and sustaining the DPP within large health systems over the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain suboptimal, particularly in low-income and underserved populations. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) may overcome common barriers to screening; however, the effect of mailed FIT kits may differ across important subpopulations. The goal of the current study was to examine sociodemographic and health-related factors that moderate the effect of an intervention of automated direct mail of FIT kits at health clinics serving low-income populations.Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) study, a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial to increase uptake of CRC screening in patients seen at federally qualified health centers. The intervention involved tools embedded in the electronic medical records to enable participating clinics to mail FIT kits and related materials to eligible participants. We examined the rate of FIT completion by potential moderating characteristics using electronic health record data supplemented by the American Community Survey and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Geographic Variation datasets, linked via geocoding to patients' addresses. All patients aged 50-75 seen in participating health clinics who were eligible for CRC screening were included.Results: Although not always statistically significant, we saw a consistent pattern of increased FIT return rates among intervention participants compared to control participants across all subgroups studied, with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) generally ranging from 1.25 to 1.50. FIT completion in the intervention group ranged from 15 and 20% across subpopulations, typically three to six percentage points higher than the control group participants. The only moderator with a statistically significant interaction was race: persons of Asian descent showed a twofold response to the intervention (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.41 to 3.00).Conclusions: Response to a mailed FIT intervention was generally consistent across a wide range of individual and neighborhood-level patient characteristics, including typically underserved patients and those in low-resource communities.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01742065. Registered on 5 December 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Pragmatic trials lack the relatively tight quality control of traditional efficacy studies and hence may pose added analytic challenges owing to the practical realities faced in carrying them out. Case Description: STOP CRC is a cluster randomized trial testing the effectiveness of automated, electronic medical record (EMR)-driven strategies to raise colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in safety net clinics. Screen-eligible participants were accrued during year 1 and followed for 12 months (measurement window) to assess completion of a fecal screening test. Control clinics implemented the intervention in year 2. Implementation Challenges/Analytic Issues: Due to limitations on how we could build the intervention tools, the overlap of the year 1 measurement windows with year 2 intervention rollout posed a potential for contamination of the primary outcome for control participants. In addition, a variety of factors led to a lack of synchronization of the measurement windows with actual intervention delivery. In both cases, the net impact of these factors would be to diminish the estimated impact of the intervention. Proposed Solutions: We dealt with the overlap issue by delaying the start of intervention rollout to control clinics in year 2 by 6 months and by truncating the measurement windows for intervention and control participants at this point. In addition we formulated three sensitivity analyses to help address the issue of asynchronization. Conclusion: This case study might help other investigators facing similar challenges think about such issues and the pros and cons of various strategies for dealing with them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Preplanned economic analysis of a pragmatic trial using electronic-medical-record-linked interactive voice recognition (IVR) reminders for enhancing adherence to cardiovascular medications (i.e., statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs], and angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]).Methods: Three groups, usual care (UC), IVR, and IVR plus educational materials (IVR+), with 21,752 suboptimally adherent patients underwent follow-up for 9.6 months on average. Costs to implement and deliver the intervention (from a payer perspective) were tracked during the trial. Medical care costs and outcomes were ascertained using electronic medical records.Results: Per-patient intervention costs ranged from $9 to $17 for IVR and from $36 to $47 for IVR+. For ACEI/ARB, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each percent adherence increase was about 3 times higher with IVR+ than with IVR ($6 and $16 for IVR and IVR+, respectively). For statins, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each percent adherence increase was about 7 times higher with IVR+ than with IVR ($6 and $43 for IVR and IVR+, respectively). Considering potential cost offsets from reduced cardiovascular events, the probability of breakeven was the highest for UC, but the IVR-based interventions had a higher probability of breakeven for subgroups with a baseline low-density lipoprotein (LDL) level of more than 100 mg/dl and those with two or more calls.Conclusions: We found that the use of an automated voice messaging system to promote adherence to ACEIs/ARBs and statins may be cost-effective, depending on a decision maker's willingness to pay for unit increase in adherence. When considering changes in LDL level and downstream medical care offsets, UC is the optimal strategy for the general population. However, IVR-based interventions may be the optimal choice for those with elevated LDL values at baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]