Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Screening Rates (screening + rate)
Selected AbstractsRoutine Screening for Asymptomatic Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in High-risk Patients Is Not Recommended in Emergency Departments That Are Frequently CrowdedACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2009Beatrice Hoffmann MD Abstract Objectives:, The objectives were to examine the feasibility of offering abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening to consecutive, asymptomatic high-risk patients in a busy emergency department (ED) and to compare the prevalence of undetected AAA among ED patients to the prevalence among similarly aged men from the general population. Methods:, A prospective cohort study was conducted at an academic community ED with an annual census of 58,000 patients. Dedicated study coordinators attempted to approach all consecutive male ED patients >50 years who presented in June,August 2007 during hours of high patient volume. To be eligible, older males had to have a smoking history or a family history of AAA. Patients were excluded if they presented with AAA symptoms, had a previous history of AAA screening or repair, had hemodynamic instability, or had an altered mental status. Study coordinators completed a brief interview with all enrolled subjects to obtain demographic and health information. A credentialed ED provider performed the ultrasound (US) screening exam and documented all findings. The US director reviewed representative images of the sonographic exam for correct visualization and measurement during quality assurance. The ED sonographers also completed a survey regarding their attitudes toward AAA screening in the ED. The primary study outcomes were the feasibility of AAA screening in the ED (screening rate, enrollment rate, US success rate, and providers' opinions) and the prevalence of AAA (aortic diameter of ,3.0 cm) in the study sample. Results:, During the 12-week study period, the study coordinators successfully approached 96% (700/729) of males > 50 years who were in the ED during study enrollment hours. Of those approached, 278 were eligible (40%), 25% were ineligible, 20% were not at high risk, and for 15% we could not determine risk factor status because of altered mental status. Of the 278 eligible, 196 (70%) underwent an US exam; 10% were not scanned because the providers were too busy, and 20% declined participation. Of those scanned, the ED sonographer was able to completely visualize and correctly measure the abdominal aortas of 71% of subjects. The prevalence rate of AAA in the study sample was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9% to 9.6%), similar to reported rates of 6 or 7% in other studies. More than half of the ED sonographers reported that US screening for AAA improved the quality of ED care (58%) and patient satisfaction (63%). However, 47% reported that AAA screening reduced ED efficiency, and 74% felt that the ED was not an appropriate setting for routine AAA screening. Conclusions:, Routine screening for asymptomatic AAA required substantial ED resources for a relatively low success rate of completed screens. The prevalence rate of AAA in our ED sample was not significantly different than prevalence estimates obtained from older men in the general population. ED sonographers reported benefits of screening in terms of improving the quality of emergency care and patient satisfaction, but also reported that it reduced operational efficiency. For EDs that have problems with crowding, we do not recommend implementing a routine screening program for AAA, even among high-risk patients. [source] Obstetrician-gynecologists' screening patterns for anxiety during pregnancy,DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY, Issue 2 2008Victoria H. Coleman M.A. Abstract As obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) take on a greater role in women's healthcare, it is important that they are aware of the high prevalence of anxiety disorders in their patient population. Anxiety disorders present during pregnancy can have detrimental effects on both mother and child. In this study, we queried 1,193 ob-gyns on their screening rates, practice patterns, training, and knowledge as they relate to anxiety disorders during pregnancy. We achieved a 44% response rate (n=397) after three mailings. Physicians reported a moderate interest in screening for and diagnosing anxiety, but less interest in treatment. Only 20% of respondents (n=79) screen for anxiety during pregnancy, and they typically refer anxiety-disordered patients to mental health professionals. Ob-gyns with comprehensive or adequate training were significantly more likely to screen than those who stated that their training was inadequate. Having a friend who has been diagnosed with an anxiety disorder also significantly increased both the likelihood that these physicians would screen and the reported level of interest in screening of anxiety disorders during pregnancy. At present, the majority of ob-gyns feel that their training in this area was barely adequate to inadequate. Specifically, generalized anxiety disorder may be the least understood. Increased training in this area would allow ob-gyns to overcome what they list as the primary barrier to anxiety screening during pregnancy,that is, inadequate training about anxiety disorders. Depression and Anxiety 0:1,10, 2007. Published © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] How can we increase the involvement of primary health care in the treatment of tobacco dependence?ADDICTION, Issue 3 2004A meta-analysis ABSTRACT Aims A systematic review of studies testing the effectiveness of educational and practice base strategies to increase the involvement of primary health-care practitioners in the treatment of tobacco dependence. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library (1966,2001). Selection criteria included studies that used randomized or controlled clinical designs, controlled before and after trials and interrupted time-series designs and that presented objective and interpretable measures of practitioners' behaviour and biochemically verified patient quit rates. Review methods A meta-analysis, using a random effects model, of 24 programmes identified in 19 trials. Effect sizes were adjusted by inverse variance weights to control for studies' sample sizes. Findings Analyses to explain the heterogeneity of effect sizes found that interventions were equally effective in changing practitioners' screening and advice-giving rates and their patients' quit rates. Absolute increases for the intervention above the comparison groups were 15% (95% CI = 7,22) for screening rates, 13% (95% CI = 9,18) for advice-giving rates and 4.7% (95% CI = 2.5,6.9) for biochemically verified patient quit rates. Practitioners in training programmes were effective in changing their patients' quit rates but not their own screening rates; educational interventions were more effective than practice-based interventions. For established practitioners, programmes were effective in changing their screening and advice-giving rates, but not their patients' quit rates; a combination of practice-based and educational interventions were more effective. Conclusions Primary health-care practitioners can be engaged in the treatment of tobacco dependence to increase equally their screening and advice-giving rates and their patients' quit rates with outcomes of considerable public health and clinical significance. The provision of educational interventions for practitioners in training in combination with systematic outreach practice-based support for established practitioners is likely to be an effective strategy to increase smoking quit rates throughout primary health care. [source] Tobacco Screening Multicomponent Quality Improvement Network Program: Beyond EducationACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2009Sharon Kimmel PhD Abstract Objectives:, Due to the addictive nature of the disease and interrelated societal influences on the behavior of tobacco use, repeated interventions are often required before people successfully stop using tobacco. Our objective was to implement a multicomponent clinical intervention initiative enabling health care providers to effectively screen for tobacco use. We also sought to describe changes in emergency medicine providers' documentation of cessation advice to tobacco users. Methods:, The intervention was conducted at three emergency departments (EDs) and four clinics at a community-based teaching hospital and health network. Health care providers with the opportunity to identify and counsel tobacco-using patients in ambulatory health care settings were the study population. The authors initiated a quality improvement initiative for tobacco screening that employed a multicomponent strategy to facilitate systemic changes that support 100% tobacco use identification, documentation, and counseling. Baseline, posteducation, and post,wrap-around documented screening rates were compared within each site across the intervention. Cumulative ED baseline, posteducation, and post,wrap-around rates of provider advice to tobacco users were compared across the intervention. Percentage of possible available gain was calculated in consideration of a 100% ceiling effect. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS and MetStat. Descriptive statistics and Pearson's chi-square cell frequency were used to analyze and compare sites. Fisher's exact test was used to compare those tests with a chi-square cell frequency of five or less. The statistical tests used for pre-/postintervention percentage comparisons by site had power between 80% and 90%, detecting differences of 10% and 20% or more at a 0.05 level of significance. Results:, Significant increases in posteducation screening rates for all ED sites complemented significant increases in ED post,wrap-around intervention screening rates. Significant increases in ED provider documented cessation advice were also noted. Conclusions:, This initiative successfully changed tobacco screening behavior of health care providers at all sites. It was particularly successful in the ED, typically an environment less likely to be conducive to preventive health interventions. [source] Alternative cervical cancer prevention in low-resource settings: Experiences of visual inspection by acetic acid with single-visit approach in the first five provinces of ThailandAUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 1 2007Buncha PALANUWONG Abstract Background:, After the confirmation of its safety, acceptability and feasibility in a cervical cancer prevention demonstration project in 2002, a visual inspection by acetic acid (VIA) followed by an effective treatment using cryotherapy as a single-visit approach (SVA) was recently introduced in five provinces having low Pap smear screening rates, in Thailand. The effectiveness of a screening program is usually associated with a high level of coverage; however, in low-resource settings such a high coverage is still hard to attain by the conventional Pap smear approach. Aims:, To evaluate whether VIA/SVA can increase women's access to the prevention services in low-resource provinces of Thailand. Methods:, A cross-sectional study was conducted by analysing electronic screening records of the provinces. A ,2 test was used in the comparisons of screening coverage between the year before and the first year of VIA/SVA implementation during 1998,2005. Results:, This comparative study, which included 88 554 screening visits totally, shows a significant increase in the screening coverage of five provinces after the VIA/SVA implementation (P < 0.001). As a result of the large substitution of VIA/SVA for Pap smears, the costs of screening were lowered by as much as $US362 300 (66.8%) in the first year. Conclusion:, VIA/SVA has provided good screening coverage and lowered the financial burden in five low-resource provinces of Thailand. Therefore, it is promisingly competitive as a potential alternative means of cervical cancer prevention in low-resource areas. [source] A trial of 3 interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening in African AmericansCANCER, Issue 4 2010Daniel S. Blumenthal MD Abstract BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. CRC incidence and mortality rates are higher among blacks than among whites, and screening rates are lower in blacks than in whites. For the current study, the authors tested 3 interventions that were intended to increase the rate of CRC screening among African Americans. METHODS: The following interventions were chosen to address evidence gaps in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Guide to Community Preventive Services: one-on-one education, group education, and reducing out-of-pocket costs. Three hundred sixty-nine African-American men and women aged ,50 years were enrolled in this randomized, controlled community intervention trial. The main outcome measures were postintervention increase in CRC knowledge and obtaining a screening test within 6 months. RESULTS: There was substantial attrition: Two hundred fifty-seven participants completed the intervention and were available for follow-up 3 months to 6 months later. Among completers, there were significant increases in knowledge in both educational cohorts but in neither of the other 2 cohorts. By the 6-month follow-up, 17.7% (11 of 62 participants) of the Control cohort reported having undergone screening compared with 33.9% (22 of 65 participants) of the Group Education cohort (P = .039). Screening rate increases in the other 2 cohorts were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that group education could increase CRC cancer screening rates among African Americans. The screening rate of <35% in a group of individuals who participated in an educational program through multiple sessions over a period of several weeks indicated that there still are barriers to overcome. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society. [source] Influence of family history and preventive health behaviors on colorectal cancer screening in African AmericansCANCER, Issue 2 2008CRNP, Kathleen A. Griffith PhD Abstract BACKGROUND. African Americans (AAs) have low rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. To the authors' knowledge, factors that influence their participation, especially individuals with a family history of CRC ("family history"), are not well understood. METHODS. A secondary analysis of the 2002 Maryland Cancer Survey data examined predictors of risk-appropriate, timely CRC screening ("screening") in AAs with a family history and in individuals without a family history. Predictors that were evaluated included age, sex, family history, mammogram or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, body mass index, activity, fruit/vegetable consumption, alcohol, smoking, perceived risk of cancer, education, employment, insurance, access to a healthcare provider, and healthcare provider recommendation of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and/or sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy. RESULTS. In individuals without a family history of CRC (N = 492), recommendation for FOBT (odds ratio [OR] of 11.90; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 6.84,20.71) and sigmoidoscopy/colonscopy (OR of 7.06; 95% CI, 4.11,12.14), moderate/vigorous activity (OR of 1.74; 95% CI, 1.06,2.28), and PSA screening history (OR of 2.68; 95% CI, 1.01,7.81) were found to be predictive of screening. In individuals with a family history (N = 88), recommendation for sigmoidoscopy/colonscopy (OR of 24.3; 95%, CI 5.30,111.34) and vigorous activity (OR of 5.21; 95% CI, 1.09,24.88) were found to be predictive of screening. However, family history did not predict screening when the analysis was controlled for age, education, and insurance. AAs who had a family history were less likely to screen compared with their white counterparts (N = 293) and compared with AAs who were at average risk for CRC (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS. Regardless of family history, healthcare provider recommendation and activity level were important predictors of screening. Lower screening rates were observed in AAs who had a family history compared with individuals who did not. The authors believe that, for AAs who have a family history, further examination of barriers and facilitators to CRC screening within the cultural context is warranted. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society. [source] Cancer screening practices of adult survivors of retinoblastoma at risk of second cancersCANCER, Issue 2 2008Victoria Sheen BA Abstract BACKGROUND. The aim of the current study was to investigate the pattern of cancer screening behavior in adult retinoblastoma survivors, who are at high risk of developing second cancers. METHODS. Self-reported cancer screening practices were investigated in a cohort of retinoblastoma survivors to evaluate whether they were receiving adequate screening for specific cancers and compare these rates with those of other adult survivors of childhood cancer and the general population. The prevalence of breast self-examination, clinical breast examination, mammography, Papanicolaou (Pap) test, testicular self-examination, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) scanning was determined from computer-aided telephone interviews with 836 retinoblastoma survivors aged >18 years. RESULTS. Among female survivors, 87% had a Pap test within the past 2 years, and 76% of females age >40 years reported having a mammogram within the past 2 years; 17.4% of male survivors had performed monthly testicular self-examinations. A significantly higher proportion of hereditary compared with nonhereditary survivors reported having undergone an MRI or CT scan in the past 5 years. Higher education, greater contact with the medical care system, and having a second cancer were found to be associated positively with most screening practices. Cancer screening practices reported by retinoblastoma survivors were similar to national screening rates for breast, cervical, and testicular cancer. CONCLUSIONS. To the authors' knowledge, the current study provides the first report of cancer screening practices of retinoblastoma survivors. Survivors of hereditary retinoblastoma should be encouraged to maintain, if not increase, their current screening practices to ensure early detection of second cancers in this high-risk population. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society. [source] Predictors of colorectal cancer screening from patients enrolled in a managed care health plan,CANCER, Issue 6 2008Melissa M. Farmer PhD Abstract BACKGROUND Despite the growing recognition of the importance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in reducing cancer mortality, national screening rates are low, indicating a critical need to understand the barriers and remedies for underutilization of CRC screening tests. METHODS Using results from independent cross-sectional telephone surveys with patients aged ,50 years performed before (2000; n = 498) and after (2003; n = 482) a quality improvement intervention for CRC screening within a large managed care health plan, the trends and predictors of CRC screening with fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and/or endoscopy (flexible sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy) were examined from a patient perspective. RESULTS In 2000, patient reported screening rates within guidelines were 38% for any test, 23% for endoscopy, and 22% for FOBT. In 2003, screening rates increased to 50% for any test, 39% for endoscopy, and 24% for FOBT. Having discussed CRC with a doctor significantly increased the odds of being screened (FOBT: odds ratio [OR], 2.09 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.47,2.96]; endoscopy: OR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.67,3.26]; and any test: OR, 2.86 [95% CI, 2.06,3.96]), and reporting barriers to CRC in general decreased the odds of being screened (FOBT: OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.60,0.95]; endoscopy: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.60,0.92]; and any test: OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.54,0.80]). CONCLUSIONS Although screening rates increased over the 3-year period, evidence was found of ongoing underutilization of CRC screening. The 2 strongest determinants of obtaining CRC screening were provider influence and patient barriers related to CRC screening in general, pointing to the need for multilevel interventions that target both the provider and patient. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society. [source] Low rates of colorectal, cervical, and breast cancer screening in Asian Americans compared with non-Hispanic whitesCANCER, Issue 1 2006Cultural influences or access to care? Abstract BACKGROUND Asian Americans have lower cancer screening rates compared with non-Hispanic whites (NHWs). Little is known about mechanisms that underlie disparities in cancer screening. The objectives of the current study were 1) to determine the relation between nativity, years in the United States, language, and cancer screening in NHWs and Asian Americans, independent of access to care and 2) to determine whether Asians reported different reasons than NHWs for not obtaining cancer screening. METHODS This population-based study included 36,660 NHWs, 1298 Chinese, 944 Filipinos, 803 Koreans, 857 Vietnamese, and 1036 Other Asians from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey. The main study outcomes were 1) self-reported colorectal, cervical, and breast cancer screening and 2) reasons for not obtaining cancer screening. RESULTS After adjusting for access to care, several Asian subgroups still had significantly lower rates of all types of cancer screening compared with NHWs. Adjusting for nativity, years in the United States, and English language attenuated the relation between Asian ethnicity and lower rates of colorectal and breast cancer screening. When they were asked what the most important reason was for not having each screening test, foreign-born Asians were significantly more likely than United States-born NHWs to report that they "didn't have problems/symptoms" (P<.01). CONCLUSIONS Nativity, years in the United States, and English language may be markers of cultural differences that are mediating cancer screening disparities. Foreign-born Asians may believe that cancer screening is in response to symptoms rather than tests that are used prior to the development of symptoms. Health education messages must consider how to communicate effectively that "cancer screening is valuable, because it finds cancer before it is advanced enough to cause symptoms." Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society. [source] | ||||||||||