Dataset Information

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Colorectal cancer screening is effective but underused. Guidelines for which tests are recommended and at what intervals depend on specific risks. We developed a tablet-based Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) that asks questions about risk prior to appointments and generates tailored printouts for patients and physicians summarizing and matching risk factors with guideline-based recommendations. METHODS:Randomized controlled trial among patients who: (i) used CRIS and they and their physicians received tailored printouts; (ii) used CRIS to answer questions but received standard information about cancer screening while their physicians received a standard electronic chart prompt indicating they were age-eligible but not currently adherent for colorectal cancer screening; or (iii) comprised a no-contact group that neither used CRIS nor received any information while their physicians received the standard prompt. Participation in testing was assessed via electronic medical record at 12 months. RESULTS:Participation in any colorectal cancer testing was three times higher for those who used the CRIS and received any printed materials, compared with no-contact controls (47% vs. 16%; P < 0.0001). Among CRIS users ages 50 and older, participation in any testing was higher in the tailored group (53% vs. 44%, P = 0.023). CONCLUSION:Use of CRIS and receipt of any information facilitated participation in testing. There was more testing participation in the CRIS-tailored than nontailored group. IMPACT:Asking patients questions about their specific risk factors and giving them and their providers information just prior to an appointment may increase participation in colorectal cancer testing. Tailoring the information has some added benefit.

SUBMITTER: Skinner CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4592452 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Skinner Celette Sugg CS Halm Ethan A EA Bishop Wendy Pechero WP Ahn Chul C Gupta Samir S Farrell David D Morrow Jay J Julka Manjula M McCallister Katharine K Sanders Joanne M JM Marks Emily E Rawl Susan M SM

Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology 20150811 10

<h4>Background</h4>Colorectal cancer screening is effective but underused. Guidelines for which tests are recommended and at what intervals depend on specific risks. We developed a tablet-based Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) that asks questions about risk prior to appointments and generates tailored printouts for patients and physicians summarizing and matching risk factors with guideline-based recommendations.<h4>Methods</h4>Randomized controlled trial among patients who: (i) used CRIS and th ...[more]

PMID: 26265201

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effect of a point of care (POC) device for testing lipids and HbA1c in addition to testing by community laboratory facilities (usual practice) on the completion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessments in general practice.MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial in 20 New Zealand general practices stratified by size and rurality and randomised to POC device plus usual practice or usual practice alone (controls). Patients aged 35-79 years were eligible if they met national guideline criteria for CVD risk assessment. Data on CVD risk assessments were aggregated using a web-based decision support programme common to each practice. Data entered into the on-line CVD risk assessment form could be saved pending blood test results. The primary outcome was the proportion of completed CVD risk assessments. Qualitative data on practice processes for CVD risk assessment and feasibility of POC testing were collected at the end of the study by interviews and questionnaire. The POC testing was supported by a comprehensive quality assurance programme.ResultsA CVD risk assessment entry was recorded for 7421 patients in 10 POC practices and 6217 patients in 10 control practices; 99.5% of CVD risk assessments had complete data in both groups (adjusted odds ratio 1.02 [95%CI 0.61-1.69]). There were major external influences that affected the trial: including a national performance target for CVD risk assessment and changes to CVD guidelines. All practices had invested in systems and dedicated staff time to identify and follow up patients to completion. However, the POC device was viewed by most as an additional tool rather than as an opportunity to review practice work flow and leverage the immediate test results for patient education and CVD risk management discussions. Shortly after commencement, the trial was halted due to a change in the HbA1c test assay performance. The trial restarted after the manufacturing issue was rectified but this affected the end use of the device.ConclusionsPerformance incentives and external influences were more powerful modifiers of practice behaviours than the POC device in relation to CVD risk assessment completion. The promise of combining risk assessment, communication and management within one consultation was not realised. With shifts in policy focus, the utility of POC devices for patient engagement in CVD preventive care may be demonstrated if fully integrated into the clinical setting.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000607774.

Project description:BackgroundSoaring health care costs and a rapidly aging population, with multiple comorbidities, necessitates the development of innovative strategies to deliver high-quality, value-based care.ObjectiveThe goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of a risk assessment system (CareSage) and targeted interventions on health care utilization.MethodsThis is a two-arm randomized controlled trial recruiting 370 participants from a pool of high-risk patients receiving care at a home health agency. CareSage is a risk assessment system that utilizes both real-time data collected via a Personal Emergency Response Service and historical patient data collected from the electronic medical records. All patients will first be observed for 3 months (observation period) to allow the CareSage algorithm to calibrate based on patient data. During the next 6 months (intervention period), CareSage will use a predictive algorithm to classify patients in the intervention group as "high" or "low" risk for emergency transport every 30 days. All patients flagged as "high risk" by CareSage will receive nurse triage calls to assess their needs and personalized interventions including patient education, home visits, and tele-monitoring. The primary outcome is the number of 180-day emergency department visits. Secondary outcomes include the number of 90-day emergency department visits, total medical expenses, 180-day mortality rates, time to first readmission, total number of readmissions and avoidable readmissions, 30-, 90-, and 180-day readmission rates, as well as cost of intervention per patient. The two study groups will be compared using the Student t test (two-tailed) for normally distributed and Mann Whitney U test for skewed continuous variables, respectively. The chi-square test will be used for categorical variables. Time to event (readmission) and 180-day mortality between the two study groups will be compared by using the Kaplan-Meier survival plots and the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression will be used to compute hazard ratio and compare outcomes between the two groups.ResultsWe are actively enrolling participants and the study is expected to be completed by end of 2018; results are expected to be published in early 2019.ConclusionsInnovative solutions for identifying high-risk patients and personalizing interventions based on individual risk and needs may help facilitate the delivery of value-based care, improve long-term patient health outcomes and decrease health care costs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03126565; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03126565 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ymDuAwQA).

Dataset Information

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure