Intervention Protocol for Automated Point-of-Care Surveillance of Outpatient Delays in Cancer Diagnosis (PACT CREATE 3)
22 février 2018 mis à jour par: VA Office of Research and Development
Automated Point-of-Care Surveillance of Outpatient Delays in Cancer Diagnosis
Many missed and delayed cancer diagnoses result from breakdowns in communication and coordination of abnormal findings suspicious for cancer, which often first emerge in the primary care setting. Delays in the follow-up of abnormal test results persist despite the reliable delivery of test results through the electronic health record.
This intervention is the final study in a three-phase project that will develop and test an innovative automated surveillance intervention to improve timely diagnosis and follow-up of five common cancers in primary care practice.
The investigators hypothesize that the median time in days from diagnostic clue to follow-up action (e.g. time to colonoscopy examination after am abnormal colon-related test) will be significantly less in the intervention arm than in usual care. The investigators also hypothesize that the proportion of patients receiving appropriate and timely follow-up care will be significantly higher in the intervention arm than in usual care.
Aperçu de l'étude
Statut
Retiré
Les conditions
Intervention / Traitement
Description détaillée
The CREATE Project encompasses three phases, the first and second of which do not contain interventions. The first phase of the project determines the effectiveness of computerized queries the investigators develop to accurately identify which patients are at risk for delays in cancer diagnosis. Patients the investigators identify will have abnormal test results or symptoms that have not been followed up by their providers. In Phase 2 of the study, the research team will use interviewing and other participatory techniques to determine the best way to convey information about such at-risk patients to providers in an automated fashion. In Phase 3 of the project, the investigators will evaluate the effects of an automated surveillance intervention on the timeliness of the diagnostic process of five cancers.
This project will improve communication and coordination of cancer-related diagnostic information to improve quality and safety.
Type d'étude
Interventionnel
Phase
- N'est pas applicable
Contacts et emplacements
Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.
Lieux d'étude
-
-
Illinois
-
Chicago, Illinois, États-Unis, 60612
- Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL
-
Hines, Illinois, États-Unis, 60141-5000
- Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL
-
-
Minnesota
-
Minneapolis, Minnesota, États-Unis, 55417
- Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
-
-
Texas
-
Houston, Texas, États-Unis, 77030
- Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX
-
-
Wisconsin
-
Madison, Wisconsin, États-Unis, 53705
- William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI
-
-
Critères de participation
Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.
Critère d'éligibilité
Âges éligibles pour étudier
21 ans et plus (Adulte, Adulte plus âgé)
Accepte les volontaires sains
Non
Sexes éligibles pour l'étude
Tout
La description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patient charts: Medical charts of Veteran patients who receive care from participating VA facility (Madison VAH, Jesse Brown VAMC, Hines VAH, Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, and Minneapolis VAMC) providers during the one year study period (tentatively October 2016-October 2017) and who have potential delays in diagnostic evaluation for lung, colorectal, liver, bladder, or breast cancer will be reviewed as part of the study.
- Providers: Providers who have seen primary care outpatients in any of the participating facilities or their outpatient clinics within the year-long study period.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patient Charts: Medical charts of patients who are not receiving care from participating facility providers or charts of patients who do not have potential follow-up delays for lung, colorectal, liver, bladder, or breast cancer in the time period of interest.
- Providers: Providers who have not seen primary care outpatients in any of the participating facilities or their outpatient clinics within the time period of interest.
Plan d'étude
Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.
Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?
Détails de conception
- Objectif principal: Recherche sur les services de santé
- Répartition: Randomisé
- Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
- Masquage: Seul
Armes et Interventions
Groupe de participants / Bras |
Intervention / Traitement |
|---|---|
|
Expérimental: Communication of Patients Lost to Follow-up to Providers
This intervention will consist of two related, continuous steps over at least a 12-month period.
In the first step, the investigators will query the VA's Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW, a repository of near real-time patient data from all VA medical centers) weekly to identify possible lost to follow-up events in a pre-specified time period and for a random sample of about half of the providers at the investigators' study sites.
These identified patient charts will be reviewed by Facility Recipients/Cancer Trackers at each site who will then communicate patients truly found to be lost to follow-up to the appropriate provider/care team.
|
The investigators will query the VA's database weekly to identify possible lost to follow-up events for a random sample of about half of the providers at our study sites.
The queries will use the trigger criteria developed in our previous work for colorectal cancer, lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, breast cancer, and bladder cancer.
The list of trigger positive patients will be transmitted to a facility-level recipient who will either disseminate the information to existing facility individual cancer care coordinators/trackers or will review the charts of the "triggered" patients in order to determine whether these patients have been truly lost to follow-up or not.
If patients are found to be lost to follow-up, the Facility Recipient or cancer care coordinator/tracker will communicate the need for follow-up to the PACT or primary care provider, using secure emails, phone calls, or in person, depending on which method of communication they deem most appropriate and effective.
|
|
Aucune intervention: Usual Care
In the usual care group, providers will continue to use the existing notification system to receive abnormal test results in accordance with institutional norms, policies, and procedures.
There are no formal patient-tracking programs currently at our study sites for all abnormal test results.
The investigators will apply our computerized surveillance tools in the usual care arm only when the investigators are ready to conduct the final chart reviews on intervention patients and identify these patients in similar time periods as in the intervention arm.
If persistent delays are found, the investigators will inform the patients' primary care providers.
|
Que mesure l'étude ?
Principaux critères de jugement
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Median Time from Initial Follow-up Delay to Follow-up Action
Délai: 1 year
|
The investigators will conduct chart reviews of patients shown by our automated surveillance system to have not received appropriate follow-up care in both intervention and control groups at least 6 months after the first documentation of a diagnostic clue (e.g., initial abnormal chest X-ray).
Chart review will be used to quantify time in days from documentation of the clinical clue to the time when follow-up action on that clue was initiated.
|
1 year
|
Collaborateurs et enquêteurs
C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.
Parrainer
Les enquêteurs
- Chercheur principal: Hardeep Singh, MD MPH BS, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX
Publications et liens utiles
La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.
Publications générales
- Murphy DR, Meyer AN, Russo E, Sittig DF, Wei L, Singh H. The Burden of Inbox Notifications in Commercial Electronic Health Records. JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Apr;176(4):559-60. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0209. No abstract available.
- Bhise V, Meyer AND, Singh H, Wei L, Russo E, Al-Mutairi A, Murphy DR. Errors in Diagnosis of Spinal Epidural Abscesses in the Era of Electronic Health Records. Am J Med. 2017 Aug;130(8):975-981. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.03.009. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
- Murphy DR, Meyer AN, Vaghani V, Russo E, Sittig DF, Richards KA, Wei L, Wu L, Singh H. Application of Electronic Algorithms to Improve Diagnostic Evaluation for Bladder Cancer. Appl Clin Inform. 2017 Mar 22;8(1):279-290. doi: 10.4338/ACI-2016-10-RA-0176.
- Meyer AND, Murphy DR, Al-Mutairi A, Sittig DF, Wei L, Russo E, Singh H. Electronic Detection of Delayed Test Result Follow-Up in Patients with Hypothyroidism. J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Jul;32(7):753-759. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-3988-z. Epub 2017 Jan 30.
- Menon S, Singh H, Giardina TD, Rayburn WL, Davis BP, Russo EM, Sittig DF. Safety huddles to proactively identify and address electronic health record safety. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Mar 1;24(2):261-267. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw153.
- Baldwin JL, Singh H, Sittig DF, Giardina TD. Patient portals and health apps: Pitfalls, promises, and what one might learn from the other. Healthc (Amst). 2017 Sep;5(3):81-85. doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2016.08.004. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
- Singh H, Graber ML, Hofer TP. Measures to Improve Diagnostic Safety in Clinical Practice. J Patient Saf. 2019 Dec;15(4):311-316. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000338.
- Singh H. Improving Diagnostic Safety in Primary Care by Unlocking Digital Data. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2017 Jan;43(1):29-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2016.10.007. Epub 2016 Oct 14. No abstract available.
- Giardina TD, Sarkar U, Gourley G, Modi V, Meyer AN, Singh H. Online public reactions to frequency of diagnostic errors in US outpatient care. Diagnosis (Berl). 2016 Mar;3(1):17-22. doi: 10.1515/dx-2015-0022. Epub 2016 Feb 19.
- Singh H, Schiff GD, Graber ML, Onakpoya I, Thompson MJ. The global burden of diagnostic errors in primary care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Jun;26(6):484-494. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005401. Epub 2016 Aug 16.
- Sittig DF, Wright A, Ash J, Singh H. New Unintended Adverse Consequences of Electronic Health Records. Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):7-12. doi: 10.15265/IY-2016-023.
- Pfoh ER, Engineer L, Singh H, Hall LL, Fried ED, Berger Z, Wu AW. Informing the Design of a New Pragmatic Registry to Stimulate Near Miss Reporting in Ambulatory Care. J Patient Saf. 2021 Apr 1;17(3):e121-e127. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000317.
Dates d'enregistrement des études
Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.
Dates principales de l'étude
Début de l'étude (Réel)
27 janvier 2017
Achèvement primaire (Réel)
27 janvier 2017
Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)
27 janvier 2017
Dates d'inscription aux études
Première soumission
16 octobre 2012
Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
18 octobre 2012
Première publication (Estimation)
19 octobre 2012
Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude
Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)
26 février 2018
Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
22 février 2018
Dernière vérification
1 février 2018
Plus d'information
Termes liés à cette étude
Termes MeSH pertinents supplémentaires
Autres numéros d'identification d'étude
- CRE 12-033
- CIRB 15-07 (Autre identifiant: VA Central IRB)
Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)
Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?
Non
Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude
Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
produit fabriqué et exporté des États-Unis.
Non
Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .