Using an Automated Data-driven, EHR-Embedded Program for Mailing FIT kits: Lessons from the STOP CRC Pilot Study

Gloria D Coronado, Tim Burdick, Amanda Petrik, Tanya Kapka, Sally Retecki, Beverly Green, Gloria D Coronado, Tim Burdick, Amanda Petrik, Tanya Kapka, Sally Retecki, Beverly Green

Abstract

Background: The Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colorectal Cancer (STOP CRC) study is collaboration among two research institutions and health-systems partners. The main study, scheduled to begin in 2014, will assess effectiveness of an intervention program using electronic health record (EHR) clinical decision support (CDS) tools to improve rates of colorectal-cancer screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Very few studies, and no large studies, aimed at raising CRC screening rates have utilized an EHR-embedded system.

Study design: We piloted the use of an EHR-embedded real-time patient registry reporting tool in a pilot study undertaken prior to beginning our main CRC screening study. The pilot study goal was to assess feasibility and effectiveness of two clinic-based approaches to raising rates of colorectal cancer screening among selected patients aged 50-74 who were not up-to-date with colorectal-cancer screening guidelines. We used work sessions and qualitative interviews with clinic personnel to assess performance of the tool, as well as to identify specific elements of the tool's functionality needing refinement.

Results: Two critical elements of the EHR tool allowed us to mail FIT kits efficiently to appropriate patients: (1) having a direct interface with the laboratory that processed the FITs, thus allowing for real-time updates to the registry; and (2) being able to place lab orders from a list of selected patients. We identified the following elements that needed refining: the use of Health Maintenance (EHR function for tracking screening eligibility and due dates incorporating STOP CRC inclusion and exclusion criteria), and the development of report templates for identifying patients eligible for each step.

Conclusion: We found that most elements of our EHR-embedded program worked well and that specific refinement may improve the accuracy of identifying patients at each step. Our findings can inform future efforts to build EHR-embedded CDS tools for preventive services.

Keywords: Clinical decision support; Colorectal cancer screening; Electronic health record; Fecal immunochemical (FIT) kit; Patient registry; Reporting workbench.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of EHR data flow for STOP CRC.

References

    1. .
    1. .
    1. Wong W, Jaffe M, Wong M, Dudl RJ. Community Implementation and Translation of Kaiser Permanente’s Cardiovascular Disease Risk-Reduction Strategy. Perm J. 2011;15:36–41.
    1. Vogelaar I, van BM, Schrag D, Boer R, Winawer SJ, et al. How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the U.S.? Mortality projections for scenarios of risk-factor modification, screening, and treatment. Cancer. 2006;107:1624–1633.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cancer Screening. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United States. 2012
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Use of colorectal cancer tests--United States, 2002, 2004, and 2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008;57:253–258.
    1. .
    1. Subramanian S, Klosterman M, Amonkar MM, Hunt TL. Adherence with colorectal cancer screening guidelines: a review. Prev Med. 2004;38:536–550.
    1. Brawarsky P, Brooks DR, Mucci LA, Wood PA. Effect of physician recommendation and patient adherence on rates of colorectal cancer testing. Cancer Detect Prev. 2004;28:260–268.
    1. Green BB, Wang CY, Anderson ML, Chubak J, Meenan RT, et al. An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:301–311.
    1. Mosen DM, Feldstein AC, Perrin N, Rosales AG, Smith DH, et al. Automated telephone calls improved completion of fecal occult blood testing. Med Care. 2010;48:604–610.
    1. Wolf MS, Satterlee M, Calhoun EA, Skripkauskas S, Fulwiler D, et al. Colorectal cancer screening among the medically underserved. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17:47–54.
    1. Coronado GD, Golovaty I, Longton G, Levy L, Jimenez R. Effectiveness of a clinic-based colorectal cancer screening promotion program for underserved Hispanics. Cancer. 2011;117:1745–1754.
    1. Walsh JM, Salazar R, Kaplan C, Nguyen L, Hwang J, et al. Healthy colon, healthy life (colon sano, vida sana): colorectal cancer screening among Latinos in Santa Clara, California. J Cancer Educ. 2010;25:36–42.
    1. Sequist TD, Zaslavsky AM, Marshall R, Fletcher RH, Ayanian JZ. Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:364–371.
    1. Coronado GD, Sanchez J, Petrik A, Kapka T, Devoe J, et al. Advantages of Wordless Instructions on How to Complete a Fecal Immunochemical Test: Lessons from Patient Advisory Council Members of a Federally Qualified Health Center. J Cancer Educ. 2013
    1. Green BB, Wang CY, Horner K, Catz S, Meenan RT, et al. Systems of support to increase colorectal cancer screening and follow-up rates (SOS): design, challenges, and baseline characteristics of trial participants. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31:589–603.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner