Improving follow-up of abnormal cancer screens using electronic health records: Trust but verify test result communication

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Singh, Hardeep ^a,b   Wilson, Lindsey ^a   Petersen, Laura A ^a,b   Sawhney, Mona K ^a   Reis, Brian ^a   Espadas, Donna ^a   Sittig, Dean F ^c  

^a MICHAEL E DEBAKEY VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COLORECTAL TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEDICAL RECORD; OCCULT BLOOD; PATIENT CARE; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION STUDY;

COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONTINUITY OF PATIENT CARE; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HOSPITALS, VETERANS; HUMANS; OCCULT BLOOD; UNITED STATES;

EID: 73949149041     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726947     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-9-49     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Is the Promise of Cancer-Screening Programs Being Compromised? Quality of Follow-Up Care after Abnormal Screening Results. K Yabroff KS Washington A Leader E Neilson J Mandelblatt, Med Care Res Rev 2003 60 294 331 10.1177/1077558703254698 12971231
2. Physician-reported reasons for limited follow-up of patients with a positive fecal occult blood test screening result. N Baig RE Myers BJ Turner, et al. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 2003 98 2078 2081 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07575.x 14499791
3. Screening for colorectal cancer. A comparison of 3 fecal occult blood tests. B Levin K Hess C Johnson, Arch Intern Med 1997 157 970 976 10.1001/archinte.157.9.970 9140267
4. A critical analysis of the largest reported mass fecal occult blood screening program in the United States. JB Morris TA Stellato BB Guy NH Gordon NA Berger, Am J Surg 1991 161 101 105 10.1016/0002-9610(91)90368-N 1987842
5. Follow-up among women with an abnormal mammogram in an HMO: is it complete, timely, and efficient? RC Burack MS Simon M Stano J George J Coombs, Am J Manag Care 2000 6 1102 1113 11184666
6. Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening. R Bastani KR Yabroff RE Myers B Glenn, Cancer 2004 101 1188 1200 10.1002/cncr.20506 15316914
7. The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer. JS Mandel TR Church JH Bond, et al. N Engl J Med 2000 343 1603 1607 10.1056/NEJM200011303432203 11096167
8. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. JS Mandel JH Bond TR Church, et al. N Engl J Med 1993 328 1365 1371 10.1056/NEJM199305133281901 8474513
9. Randomized study of biennial screening with a faecal occult blood test: results after nine screening rounds. O Kronborg OD Jorgensen C Fenger M Rasmussen, Scand J Gastroenterol 2004 39 846 851 10.1080/00365520410003182 15513382
10. Measuring the Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Importance of Follow-Up. D Etzioni E Yano L Rubenstein, et al. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 2006 49 1002 1010 10.1007/s10350-006-0533-2 (Pubitemid 44060854)
11. Barriers to full colon evaluation for a positive fecal occult blood test. DA Fisher A Jeffreys CJ Coffman K Fasanella, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006 15 1232 1235 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0916 16775188
12. Physician Intention to Recommend Complete Diagnostic Evaluation in Colorectal Cancer Screening. RE Myers T Hyslop M Gerrity, et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999 8 587 593 10428195
13. Impact of a physician-oriented intervention on follow-up in colorectal cancer screening. RE Myers B Turner D Weinberg, et al. Prev Med 2004 38 375 381 10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.11.010 15020170
14. Reasons Patients With a Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test Result Do Not Undergo Complete Diagnostic Evaluation. M Jimbo RE Myers B Meyer, et al. Ann Fam Med 2009 7 11 16 10.1370/afm.906 19139444
15. Diagnostic errors and abnormal diagnostic tests lost to follow-up: a source of needless waste and delay to treatment. T Wahls, J Ambul Care Manage 2007 30 338 343 17873665
16. Design and implementation of a comprehensive outpatient Results Manager. EG Poon SJ Wang TK Gandhi DW Bates GJ Kuperman, J Biomed Inform 2003 36 80 91 10.1016/S1532-0464(03)00061-3 14552849
17. Communication outcomes of critical imaging results in a computerized notification system. H Singh HS Arora MS Vij R Rao M Khan LA Petersen, J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007 14 459 466 10.1197/jamia.M2280 17460135
18. Reducing Diagnostic Errors Through Effective Communication: Harnessing the Power of Information Technology. H Singh A Naik R Rao L Petersen, Journal of General Internal Medicine 2008 23 489 494 10.1007/s11606-007-0393-z 18373151
19. Using a multifaceted approach to improve the follow-up of positive fecal occult blood test results. H Singh H Kadiyala G Bhagwath, et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2009 104 942 952 10.1038/ajg.2009.55 19293786
20. The Veterans Affairs root cause analysis system in action. JP Bagian J Gosbee CZ Lee L Williams SD McKnight DM Mannos, Jt Comm J Qual Improv 2002 28 531 545 12369156
21. Performing subjectivist studies in the qualitative traditions responsive to users. JS Ash AC Smith PZ Stavri, Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics Springer New York, Friedman CP, Wyatt JC, 2 2006 267 300 full-text
22. Workarounds to Barcode Medication Administration Systems: Their Occurrences, Causes, and Threats to Patient Safety. R Koppel T Wetterneck JL Telles BT Karsh, J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008 15 408 423 10.1197/jamia.M2616 18436903
23. Automated Notification of Laboratory Test Results in an Electronic Health Record: Do Any Safety Concerns Remain? H Singh E Thomas LA Petersen, American Journal of Medicine
24. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: A study of closed malpractice claims. TK Gandhi A Kachalia EJ Thomas, et al. Ann Intern Med 2006 145 488 496 17015866
25. Learning from malpractice claims about negligent, adverse events in primary care in the United States. RL Phillips Jr LA Bartholomew SM Dovey GE Fryer Jr TJ Miyoshi LA Green, Qual Saf Health Care 2004 13 121 126 10.1136/qshc.2003.008029 15069219
26. Errors in cancer diagnosis: current understanding and future directions. H Singh S Sethi M Raber LA Petersen, J Clin Oncol 2007 25 5009 5018 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.2142 17971601
27. Eight Rights of Safe Electronic Health Record Use. DF Sittig H Singh, JAMA 2009 302 1111 1113 10.1001/jama.2009.1311 19738098
28. Doing better with critical test results. DW Bates LL Leape, Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2005 31 66 67 15791765