Colorectal Cancer QI Improvement, Dissertation – Literature Example
Words: 7207Dissertation - Literature
CRC screening is hampered by the lack of a physician’s advice. Although patients come with indications such as rectal bleeding, blood in the stool, diarrhea, primary care physicians (PCPs) seldom provide CRC screening (Holt et al., 2009). Because of the urgent nature of the appointment, infrequent appointment visits, a lack of a monitoring mechanism, or inaccurate perceptions that individuals are not interested in getting tested, PCPs frequently fail to mention CRC screenings (Levy et al., 2007). This article will discuss a study that assesses whether CRC screening adherence in primary care would improve if a team-based strategy, effective electronic systems engineering, and patient and staff education were used.
All adult individuals aged 50 to 55 years who were seen at our inpatient or outpatient throughout the year were identified through a scan of electronic medical records (E-Clinical Works). The goal of the present research was to see if CRCs were ever done, and if so, what particular results were recorded. For example, if a colonoscopy was conducted purely for medical testing, participants were excluded.
Theme 1: Colorectal Cancer
CRC is the second-largest cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Older age, male gender, and genetic susceptibility have been linked to a higher risk of CRC death (wolf et al., 2018). Despite extensive study on modifiable hazard variables for CRC, the impact of various demographics, nutritional, and behavioral factors on CRC death remains unknown. Body mass index (BMI) (Shaukat et al., 2017), processed meat consumption, vegetables and fruits, caffeine, and liquor consumption are all equivocal; however, aspirin usage has been linked to a lower risk of CRC fatality (Hurwitz et al., 2021). It is self-evident that being obese or overweight increases your chance of acquiring colon cancer and dying from it. In both males and females, being obese increases colon and rectal cancers, although the relationship appears to be greater in men. Reduce your risk by achieving and maintaining a healthy weight.
Carcinogens and toxins in cigarette smoke are thought to induce long-term harm to DNA and internal organs, leading to a variety of health problems. Whereas most individuals are informed that smoking may harm your airways, cardiovascular, and other respiratory systems, many are uninformed that it also has a significant influence on colorectal wellness. Polyps in the colon and rectum are abnormal growths. While polyp isn’t necessarily malignant, it can grow into cancer if left untreated. Smokers have more colon polyps that are bigger and more frequent (Aredo et al., 2021). Aredo further states that being a parent, sibling, or kid with colon cancer increases acquiring colon cancer.
As individuals become older, their incidence of colorectal cancer rises. Younger individuals can get colorectal cancer; however, most colorectal malignancies occur in persons over the age of 50 (Ma et al., 2021). Men are on average 68 years old when diagnosed with colon cancer, while women are on average 72 years old (Ma et al., 2021). Both men and women are diagnosed with rectal cancer at the age of 63. Colorectal cancer patients over the age of 50 have significant obstacles, particularly in terms of cancer therapy. While colon cancer is still most often detected in older individuals, the relative risk for colon cancer in aged persons between 55 and older has decreased by around 3.6 percent each year, according to the latest figures (Ma et al., 2021). Adults under the age of 55, on the other hand, saw their incidence rate rise by 2% every year. The rise is mostly attributable to an upsurge in the incidence of cases of endometrial carcinoma—individuals under the age of 50 accounts for around 11% of all colorectal diagnoses. The cause of this increase in younger individuals is unknown, and study is ongoing.
In the U.S., black individuals have the greatest incidence of spontaneous or non-hereditary colorectal cancer. In addition, colorectal cancer is the greatest cause of cancer-related mortality among African-Americans (Blackman, 2021). Colorectal cancer is more common in women of color than in any other ethnic group, and Black males are far more prone than Black females to die from the disease. The causes of these disparities are unknown (Blackman, 2021). Since Hispanics are more likely than white people to be confirmed with colorectal cancer when they are youthful (Veramonte et al., 2020; Blackman, 2021), screening earlier in life may detect abnormalities in the colon at a time once they are easier to cure.
When relatives have had colorectal cancer, it may pass in the household. This is particularly true if a sibling is confirmed with colorectal cancer before reaching 60 (Goldstein et al., 2019). A person’s chance of acquiring colorectal cancer is roughly doubled if they have a family background of the illness (Goldstein et al., 2019). If additional family members have had colorectal cancer or first-degree relatives were identified at a relatively young age, the rate rises even more (Ochs-Balcom et al., 2021).
Routine screening can help avoid a lot of colorectal cancers. Pre-cancerous polyps in the colon can be detected during screening and eliminated before they evolve into cancer. Increased CRC screening can lead to better clinical outcomes by detecting and removing pre-cancerous polyps earlier. This study aimed to enhance Cancer screening ratios at a nurse-managed clinic by using quality improvement (Q.I.) measures. Colorectal cancer screening has been demonstrated to be successful and cost-efficient in lowering the incidence and death of the disease. Despite its proven effectiveness, colon cancer screening is underutilized, with less than 60% of age-eligible people stating that they have completed all recommended screening tests. The poor usage rates are due to various causes, including patients, practitioners, and framework problems. Several treatments, including patient choice aids, have been proven to help overcome these hurdles. Patient choice aids are tools that give clients access to screening possibilities, support them in weighing the pros and disadvantages of the possibilities, and help them make a decision that is compatible with their beliefs. Decision aids can boost screening levels by up to 14 % in medical care. It indicates that mailing the decision aids to patients before routine care is a cost-effective method of deployment.
The practice of checking for cancer in persons who have no disease symptoms is known as screening. Among the most effective methods for avoiding colon cancer is periodic colorectal cancer screening. According to Keum & Giovannucci, 2019, It generally takes 10 to 15 years for the initial aberrant cells to proliferate into tumors and then for them to grow into colorectal cancer. The majority of polyps may be identified and eliminated with frequent screening lest they grow into cancer. Colorectal cancer can also be detected early when it is tiny and simpler to cure. You could start being tested for colorectal cancer if you’re 45 or older (Beeker et al., 2000). There are several different sorts of tests that may be employed. Consult your physician to see which ones could be appropriate for you. The essential thing is to be tested, regardless of whatever exam you pick.
CRCS is recommended for those with an intermediate risk of colon cancer around the age of 50, according to doctors (Goldstein et al., 2019). People at a higher risk for cancer, including those with a family history of the disease, should contemplate screening sooner. There are numerous screening choices available, each with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, it is needful to seek your doctor to get informed about your options, and the two of you can determine which procedures are right for you.
Generally, cuisines high fiber, fruits, and whole grains, as well as limited in red and industrialized meats, are thought to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer, but it is still unclear which components are significant (Yue et al., 2021). Several researchers have associated red meats and processed foods with an elevated risk of colorectal cancer. In recent times, several large studies have found inconsistent indications that dietary fiber reduces the risk of colon cancer. This field of study is currently being researched. Recent research looking particularly at whole carbohydrate intake, on the other hand, suggests that increasing your whole cereal intake lowers your risk of colon cancer. Minimize your chances by eating more fruit, vegetables, and entire grain and avoiding red and industrialized meats.
Some research shows that taking the regular supplement with folic acid, or folate, may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer, although this has not been proven in all trials. Fife et al., 2011, suggests that folic acid may aid the growth of existing malignancies. Vitamin D, which you may receive through the sun, certain foods, or a vitamin pill, has been linked to a decreased risk of colorectal cancer in some research. According to research, according to Gorham et al. (2007), Levels of Vitamin D have been linked to an elevated risk of colorectal cancer and other malignancies. Most doctors do not advocate this as a strategy to reduce colorectal cancer risk at this time due to considerations that excessive sun exposure might cause skin cancer. More research is needed to establish whether supplementing with vitamin D can mitigate colorectal cancer (Fife et al., 2011). Preventing a deficiency in vitamin D may be beneficial; however, you should consult your physician if your vitamin D level must be evaluated.
In certain investigations, reduced nutritional calcium levels have been associated with an increased risk of colon cancer. On the other hand, other research suggests that increasing calcium consumption may reduce the incidence of colon cancer. Aside from the potential impacts on cancer incidence, calcium is essential for a variety of health reasons. However, the American Cancer Society (2010) does not have any specific suggestions regarding dairy food intake for preventing cancer due to possible excessive risk of prostate cancer in men who consume a lot of calcium/dairy products, as well as the probable lower risk of several other cancers like pre-cancerous colorectal lesion. Finally, smoking as a risk factor to colon cancer Protracted smoking has been related to a higher risk of colorectal cancer, as well as a variety of other malignancies and health issues (Aredo et al., 2021). Therefore, stopping smoking may reduce your chance of colorectal cancer as well as a variety of other cancers.
Given different CRC screening (CRCS) alternatives, the national screening criteria are not followed by half of all U.S. individuals aged 50 and higher Moyer, 2014). In addition, at-risk susceptible populations (clinically underserved, minority populations, new immigrants) and those with poor socioeconomic factors are particularly underserved by CRCS testing. As a result, physicians and other practitioners are at the vanguard of initiatives to support CRCS across many vulnerable and at-risk populations, particularly patients getting treatment in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) (Adedoyin et al., 2017). However, due to the rising national need to enhance CRCS, developing effective patient-centered and clinic-based plans to promote screening rates in FQHCs utilizing the most available tests to this group remains a key problem.
Some of the impediments and motivators to screening for CRC include the following:
Lack of health coverage (barrier): People without insurance cannot receive the tests (Muthukrishnan et al., 2019). The influence of limited resources on the invoice of a regular fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy for colon cancer screening among policyholders is assessed.
Perceived need for cancer testing might be one of the barriers to colonoscopy. Different potential patients say they don’t feel anything negative and therefore would not opt for cancer screening since they are okay. Lack of knowledge in lower socio-economical classes with limited literacy is the most important barrier to CRC screening. As such, designing educational programs involving physicians and media is important to improve CRC screening rates.
The absence of a physician’s advice creates a physical barrier that obstructs the necessity for screening. Different doctors do not provide their patients with the necessary information at the proper moment. Colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) has been proven to be beneficial, and clinical practice guidelines regularly urge it. Unfortunately, only little more than half of all Americans have ever been tested (EL-Shami et al., 2015). The most significant incentive for screening, according to patients, is a doctor’s advice. Unfortunately, numerous physicians, patients, and system hurdles exist when it comes to suggesting CRCS. To substantially improve physician endorsement of CRCS, initiatives may need to tackle obstacles at several levels.
Fear of receiving a cancer diagnosis (barrier): Most individuals are inclined to feel afraid. For one thing, people are afraid of being screened for cancer and receiving a cancer diagnosis. Perhaps these individuals don’t want to know how they’re doing. The misconceptions surrounding colon cancer play a large role in this. “There is nothing I can do to prevent colon cancer,” for example. The truth is that many individuals are unaware that colon cancer may be avoided. For example, a limited, high-vegetable, fruit-rich diet combined with frequent exercise may lower your chance of acquiring the illness. In addition, because non-cancerous polyps cause most colon cancer, screening procedures can identify and remove polyps before they turn malignant.
Cancer management and treatment serve as a motivation to believe that finding and removing polyps inside the body will relieve patients’ symptoms and thus feel better. Colon cancer can be cured if caught early. Colon cancer limited to the colon or rectum can be treated in around 90% of cases (Labianca et al., 2010). Unfortunately, only 37% of all instances are detected at this point, which is a concern. The remainder, 63 percent, wait until the illness has gone well beyond the colon or rectum wall or to other regions of the body before seeking medical help.
Cancer screening might be influenced by family history. If someone in your family has had colon cancer, someone else will probably be afflicted as well. As a result, they are more likely to be tested. The truth is that around 75% of all new occurrences of colon cancer occur in people who have no recognized health risks other than being 50 years old or older (Labianca et al., 2010). Therefore, if you have a family history of cancer, you may have to begin screening sooner or undergo tests more often.
Theme 2: Colorectal cancer screening
Access to screening
Fear, humiliation, bowel movement, lack of knowledge, and provide guidelines, cost, and transportation have all been identified as barriers to preventive care screening in previous studies. Muthukrishnan et al. (2018) initiated a cluster-randomized experiment of 490 patients aged 50 and up who were given closed open-ended questions to explore the patients’ perspectives of their barriers. Even though more than 87 percent of patients had access to free preventative medicine through their insurance, just 65 percent of those polled had ever received a colorectal cancer test. Even though insurance covered more than 87 percent of preventative treatments, just 65 percent of patients have ever received a colorectal cancer examination. The qualitative data obtained in this research demonstrated that a small proportion did not have an insurer recommendation, that one-third noted fear, feel anxiety, and economic hardship, that screening had been a minor issue, and that they characterized distress or revulsion with the procedure of altering their stool (Muthukrishnan et al., 2018). This research indicates an information and knowledge gap about the need for CRC screening. Despite having health insurance, insured individuals are still not getting their tests performed, and more exploratory research is needed to uncover the hurdles for those individuals who do have accessibility to screening.
Preventive care screenings are diagnostic tests that healthcare professionals prescribe to help identify particular health concerns. As a result, these tests can help prevent or classify diseases early. Miller et al. (2017) conducted a methodical evaluation of behavioral change to see if it improved patients’ perceptions of sustaining their wellbeing and getting their medical checks and physical exams to identify and prevent disease. Furthermore, the efficacy of preventative education for increasing health screening uptake was carefully evaluated and assessed in this study. The findings indicated a long-term commitment to screening as a top priority. Conversely, in CRC screening, preventative assessment completeness is underused in the United States, with the biggest group of persons not tested at the right time-spanning in age from 50 to 75, indicating a need to increase preventative measures test scores.
Cancer preventive screenings are critical for the early detection of the illness. Colorectal cancer is the third most prevalent cancer in males and females, prompting attempts to stop and address the illness earlier enough to minimize fatalities. Issa and Noureddine (2017) performed qualitative research that revealed that accessibility to preventive strategies and treatments differed by state. Many preventive cancers have the disadvantage of having practically no early symptoms. Colonoscopy screenings decrease colorectal cancer death rates, but the advantage is not consistent across various regions of the colon, and it is an intrusive treatment that may not be cost-effective, according to the study.
Furthermore, several factors influence the accuracy of the screenings and the various features of distal and proximal colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer screening is required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for insurance companies in the U.S. They may, however, have varied screening protocols that range from fecal screening instruments to processes such as a colonoscopy, and screenings are influenced by effectiveness, access, and screenings adherence (Issa & Noureddine, 2017). According to this study, the inaccessibility to eligible adults may not remain despite the ACA’s adoption, which highlights the gap in universal guidelines for preventative screening.
All demographics now have accessibility to treatment, including preventable health screenings, thanks to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Global Burden of Disease committee (GBD) suggests raising the workforce’s priority that meets the age requirements for testing. Russell et al. (2019) carried out a five-year (Ramdzan et al., 2019) descriptive and analytical symmetric mixed-method approach to evaluate six different measures to promote the fulfillment of prevention methods in seniors in primary care; this orientation has placed a greater focus on better health to prevention screenings for those with insurance The investigation examined the implications of making primary care more accessible to people. The study participants are sensitive individuals in primary care clinics, clinicians and administrative personnel, and other health or social assistance organizations. Surveys, institutional data, content analysis, and instruments for gathering the budget of intervention programs were gathered before and three and six months after the initiatives (Russell et al., 2019). Colorectal cancer cases have decreased with the implementation of staff guidance and outreach. This long-term research validates this high-quality strategy by emphasizing the need for regular testing via primary care.
Given the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the United States suffers greatly from insufficient healthcare funding and access, which has a negative impact on citizens’ access to quality healthcare and their overall health; Zhou et al. (2020) performed cross-section reliance and uniformity tests to verify cross-sectional dependence and to address our sociocultural consistency. Their findings recommended that the healthcare industry and agriculture sectors adopt effective and integrated measures to help minimize avoidable illnesses, which would lower healthcare expenses, morbidity, and death in the long term (Zhou et al., 2020). Furthermore, the outcome.
Different Screening Techniques
A colonoscopy is a procedure that allows a doctor to see into your big intestine. This operation is carried out using a scope, which is a telescopic camera (Knudsen et al., 2021). This test is performed to screen for polyps and probable indications of colon cancer and screen for indicators like hemorrhage. Adults should begin having colonoscopies at the age of 45 (Knudsen et al., 2021). A lengthy, floppy, illuminated view tube (colonoscope) is introduced through the rectum into the colon throughout a conventional colonoscopy. The lens is extended and manipulated as projections onto a tv screen to view the lumens and margins of the colon. Devices can be inserted via the colonoscope’s canals to conduct biopsies, excise polyps, or cauterize hemorrhages (Knudsen et al., 2021). To assist give a better sight area for examination, air, liquid, and suction might be used.
Some individuals avoid the process out of shame or a lack of willingness to prepare. There are a variety of bowel preparations available, each with its size and flavor profile. Moreover, the colonoscopy staff is sensitive to your privacy throughout the operation. Colonoscopies are performed to look for polyps or cancers in the colon. Polyps can’t switch into cancer if they’re removed early.
By completing 1-3 bowel functions, the FOBT test can identify blood in feces that cannot be detected with the naked eye. A FIT is frequently used to identify bleeding in the gastrointestinal system that has no other symptoms or indications (Sharma, 2020). A FIT test is comparable to an FOBT; however, it is newer and does not require a restrictive diet before the testing. The gathering technique for such a test varies by maker, but you generally collect a sample of feces with a specialized spoon or other instrument and keep it in a collecting receptacle included with the test kit. Subsequently, the collection container is sent or delivered to your doctor or an approved lab (Sharma, 2020). Since immunochemical screening is much sensitive than the guaiac fobt test, it is preferable. Furthermore, there are no nutritional limitations required before suggesting remedies, and screening may frequently be done on a randomized stool specimen.
Cologuard is colorectal cancer and precancer physical exam that uses a stool sample (your bowels movements). Your colon loses cells that lining it every day. Normal cells and malignant cells from precancer or malignancies are discharged into the colon during this process. As your feces travels through your colon, it takes up those cells. Cologuard is a stool test that detects the DNA and hemoglobin produced by aberrant cells (Resnick & Uphoff, 2015). A positive result indicates that the test discovered aberrant DNA and/or blood that might indicate colon precancer or malignancy (Resnick & Uphoff, 2015). Conversely, the test might potentially produce an incorrectly positive result (false positive). This indicates that the diagnosis is positive, but there is no cancer or precancer evident.
A negative result indicates that aberrant DNA and/or blood were not detected in the sample. In addition, the test might potentially produce a Negative, erroneous result (false negative) (Resnick & Uphoff, 2015). This indicates that the test result missed a malignancy or precancer. As a result, it is advised that you schedule routine tests. Discuss your test results with your doctor. Your physician will advise you on the optimal screening plan for you.
Suppose an individual has diarrhea, bleeding in their urine or stool, blood hemorrhoid, bleeding scrapes or cuts on their palms, rectal bleeding, or periods. In that case, they should not submit a specimen for Cologuard. The lab must receive the client samples within 72 hours after collection to guarantee the sample’s viability (Resnick & Uphoff, 2015). Fecal samples should be sent to the lab by patients.
Clinical decision support
Cancer is the top cause of mortality in the World; in 2018, 1.7 million men and women were diagnosed with cancer, with nearly half of those diagnosed dying from the disease (Bray et al., 2018). Furthermore, the global incidence of cancer cases continues to rise each year. As indicated in a cross-sectional study by Saman et al. (2021) that mailed a survey to adult primary care patients two weeks after the patient finished a planned visit with their healthcare practitioner (Navarrete-Pak, 2016), several cancer types, particularly colorectal cancer, can be identified by routine screening, leading to early identification. Patients’ perceptions and comprehension of cancer screening as addressed with their primary care physician were examined. However, this research did not demonstrate a significance level. It showed scientific validity. It had a favorable influence on the patients’ choice to undertake their main clinician’s suggested cancer preventive screening.
Colorectal cancer screening is the most effective approach to reduce morbidity and death, and a clinical decision support system (CDSS) can help forecast screening procedure success (Stojadinovic et al., 2013). DSS is a computer-based monitoring system that helps preventative care providers offer better treatment. A CDSS aids in complicated screening decision-making and plays a significant role in establishing the best possible relationships between the colonoscopy, histology, and laboratory units. Workflow analysis may also be used to discover data reconciliation techniques for filling in gaps in paperwork.
According to Elangovan et al., 2016, cancer and its stigma have long been most feared due to its association with poor health and death. The findings revealed that most respondents were aware that cancer is not infectious and that it may be cured; nevertheless, one-fifth of the participants did not think that lifestyle changes have a role in cancer risk and that only individuals 65 and older acquire it cancer. This study also emphasizes investing in more health engagement, media use, and public awareness initiatives that target the general population regardless of access to primary care physicians.
Recognizing the ideas, perceptions, health services, and economics that create obstacles to cancer screening is essential to shaping behaviors toward cancer preventive screening. A cross-sectional investigation by Kim et al. (2018; 2020) employing a cellphone and in-person surveys with women aged 50-80 years inpatient healthcare found that clinicians must build a provider-patient connection to assist patients to comprehend the value of cancer screening (Chiu H-C, 2017). In San Francisco, California, the work is based on a multicultural population of individuals. The findings were similar to those of prior research in patients with a strong family history, and all individuals had a greater risk appraisal due to a lack of follow-up and self-reported complaints (Kim et al., 2018). Furthermore, this study found that patients’ risk assessment for colorectal cancer screening was considerably greater in this demographic, contradicting more recent studies.
Mailing the Fecal occult blood test kit (FOBT/FIT) and patient education
A fecal occult blood test is a simple, non-invasive diagnostic test that you may do at your leisure at your residence. Your doctor will give you a package that includes guidelines for doing the test. The guaiac smear method (gFOBT) and the immunochemical technique are the two major forms of fecal occult blood testing (iFOBT or FIT) (Chido-Amajuoyi, 2019). The standard procedures for each exam are listed below. Based on the brand of the test kit, your directions may differ somewhat. For example, the FIT test is more selective at identifying blood from the lower gastrointestinal tract than the FOBT since it may not detect blood farther up the digestive system (such as the stomach) (Chido-Amajuoyi, 2019).
Cancer risk is determined by many genetic, biological, and age variables, and many cancers have screening established to identify cancer at an early phase; Besharati et al. (2017) did research that highlights the value of developing CRC screening programs for adults on a theoretical foundation. The information gathered might improve the content and style of referrals to colorectal cancer screening services. It was a major strategy to enhance screenings, and the research looked into additional options for increasing colorectal cancer screening. The research also looked at the impact of the findings on a pilot project they ran, demonstrating the need for more subjective research on the impacts of sending FOBT kits to increase CRC screening test scores. This study is in line with this concept, which is theoretically based.
Increasing access to preventive screening by combining various sources makes advantage of a mechanism accessible to everyone in the United States. Tinmouth et al. (2020) reviewed a 2015 analysis on the performance of mail-in colorectal cancer screening. They found that establishing quality improvement techniques involving an upfront notice letter and a reminder letter can enhance public awareness and improve accessibility to CRC screening. A randomized study in primary healthcare was undertaken as part of the 2020 research.
In previous pilot research, the sampled patients had done an FOBT and tested negative, and they were now scheduled for their yearly screening. The interventional cohort obtained a CRC screening statement via their primary care provider along with the FOBT kit, whereas the control group received only the letter (Subramanian et al., 2018). The experimental group, which received the FOBT kit, had a greater FOBT uptake than the control group, which simply got the direct-mailed screening reminders. Compared to the control group, study participants in the interventional cohort were more determined to accomplish the FOBT (Tinmouth et al., 2020). This study showed that sending an FOBT kit directly to patients improved CRC screening. The study also found that instead of a direct-mailed CRC screening notice, the FOBT screening kit should be used to intervene, and health promotion should be included (Pender, 2013).
Issaka et al. (2019) conducted a systematic study on the impact of sending CRC screening straight to qualified applicants. When likened to the benchmark of waiting for the service user to plan a holistic health test with their healthcare practitioner, which is dependent solely on the seniors fetching the kit from the approved laboratory, this action for excellent CRC screening demonstrated a significant difference in the successful delivery of CRC screening (Chido-Amajuoyi, 2019). Importantly, data shows that direct mailing of colon cancer screening test results and invites to yearly wellness checks from general practitioners boosted the percentage of CRC testing compliance.
Myers et al. (2019) utilized a randomized control experiment to propose a follow-up call seven days after shipping the kits, which is not a standard procedure to remind individuals to complete the essential cancer-preventive tests.CRC screening using the FOBT was more probable to be completed by patients receiving extra CRC screening support in the context of a booklet. When extra patient guidance was done by contacting the patient, the findings revealed increased CRC screening compliance. The individual would then be contacted at the end of every week to see if they did receive this same kit and if they could have any specific questions regarding CRC screening or how to fulfill the FOBT kit (Chido-Amajuoyi, 2019). It was discovered that clients were significantly more likely to participate in CRC screening with extra assistance through provider route planning (Myers et al., 2019). Future research should incorporate clinician telephone follow-up (Chiu H-C et al., 2017) with CRC testing mailings. This effective service improvement initiative employs FOBT kits directly addressed to patients with further health education, clinician guidance, and the necessity of CRC screening should be promoted.
Colorectal cancer screening’s main objective is to reduce colorectal cancer fatalities (Hewitson et al., 2007). Screening assessment can show detect malignancies at an early stage, while they are still treatable. Screening can also help avert cancer by diagnosing and managing pre-cancerous benign cysts that can be eliminated before they progress to malignancy. Older should start having colorectal cancer screenings at 45 or earlier, based on their likelihood of acquiring the disease. There are several diagnostic tests, each with its own set of benefits and drawbacks. The best screening test for you is determined by your personal preferences as well as your risk of getting colorectal cancer.
The basic principles of empowering reviews to ensuring sufficient buy, improving processes notified by patient information, and appreciating frequent project reviews to staff, strengthened this Q.I. project and ensured adoption and viability of these results, according to this project. When colonoscopy is used as the primary screening technique, many obstacles have been found that substantially lead to a low CRC screening level. According to the Q.I. study, foreign-born patients are more likely than Whites to fail to complete CRC screening. A regression analysis study of patients of color revealed that being employed indicated a lack of adherence with conducting a colonoscopy. Moreover, compared to white patients, individuals of other races tend to be less likely to get CRC screening tests (Blackman, 2021). There is a scarcity of studies on how to enhance CRC screening. As mentioned earlier, the research outlines a quality improvement (Q.I.) project to improve CRC screening rates in various clinics.
This study examines a CRCs quality improvement effort. Our facility has designed and assessed numerous areas for opportunities for improvement. Presenting cultural and language-adapted advertising and curriculum materials, contact outreach, and advocating for the idea that any screening test is preferable to none are all simple methods. Considering that other unscreened patients failed to finish the tests as prescribed, additional outreach is required. Individualized conversations are essential for improving patient understanding and removing any prejudice or fear of CRC screening. More actions are needed to guarantee adequate screening for a preventable illness, according to this study.
Adedoyin, C. A., Ainsworth, M. C., Albright, K., Allen, S., Atnafou, R., Bateman, L. B., … & Moellering, D. (2017). 12th Annual UAB Health Disparities Research Symposium May 3, 2017.
American Cancer Society [ACS]. (2020, November). American Cancer Society guideline for colorectal cancer screening. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectal-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/acs-recommendations.html
Aredo, J. V., Luo, S. J., Gardner, R. M., Sanyal, N., Choi, E., Hickey, T. P., Riley, T. L., Huang, W.-Y., Kurian, A. W., Leung, A. N., Wilkens, L. R., Robbins, H. A., Riboli, E., Kaaks, R., Tjønneland, A., Vermeulen, R. C. H., Panico, S., Le Marchand, L., Amos, C. I., … Han, S. S. (2021). Tobacco Smoking and Risk of Second Primary Lung Cancer. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 16(6), 968–979. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2021.02.024
Beeker, C., Kraft, J. M., Southwell, B. G., & Jorgensen, C. M. (2000). Colorectal cancer screening in older men and women: qualitative research findings and implications for intervention. Journal of community health, 25(3), 263-278.
Besharati, F., Karimi-Shahanjarini, A., Hazavehei, S. M. M., Bashirian, S., Bagheri, F., & Faradmal, J. (2017). Development of a colorectal cancer screening intervention for Iranian adults: Applying intervention mapping. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention: APJCP, 18(8), 2193-2199. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.8.2193.
Blackman, Elizabeth L. (2021). “Colorectal Cancer Screening Prevalence and Adherence for the Cancer Prevention Project of Philadelphia (CAP3) Participants Who Self-Identify as Black”. Frontiers in oncology (2234-943X), 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.690718
Bray, F., Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., Siegel, R. L., Torre, L. A., & Jemal, A. (2018). Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 68(6), 394-424.
Chido-Amajuoyi, O. G., Sharma, A., Talluri, R., Tami-Maury, I., & Shete, S. (2019). Physician-office vs. home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible U.S. adults. Cancer Medicine, 8(17), 7408–7418. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1002/cam4.2604
Chiu H-C, Hung H-Y, Lin H-C, Chen S-C. (2017). Effects of health education and telephone counseling program on patients with a positive fecal occult blood test result for colorectal cancer screening: A randomized controlled trial. Psycho-oncology. 2017;26(10):1498-1504. doi:10.1002/pon.4319
Elangovan, A., Skeans, J., Lalani, I., Ullah, F., Roy, A., Kaelber, D. C., Cooper, G. S., & Sandhu, D. S. (2021). Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System. Dig Dis Sci, 66, 2585–2594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06545-3
El‐Shami, K., Oeffinger, K. C., Erb, N. L., Willis, A., Bretsch, J. K., Pratt‐Chapman, M. L., … & Cowens‐Alvarado, R. L. (2015). American Cancer Society colorectal cancer survivorship care guidelines. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 65(6), 427-455.
Fife, J., Raniga, S., Hider, P. N., & Frizelle, F. A. (2011). Folic acid supplementation and colorectal cancer risk: a meta‐analysis. Colorectal Disease, 13(2), 132-137.
Gellad, Z. F., & Provenzale, D. (2010). Colorectal cancer: a national and international perspective on the burden of disease and public health impact. Gastroenterology, 138(6), 2177-2190.
Goldstein, K. M., Fisher, D. A., Wu, R. R., Orlando, L. A., Coffman, C. J., Grubber, J. M., Rakhra-Burris, T., Wang, V., Scheuner, M. T., Sperber, N., Datta, S. K., Nelson, R. E., Strawbridge, E., Provenzale, D., Hauser, E. R., & Voils, C. I. (2019). An electronic family health history tool to identify and manage patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials, 20(1). https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3659-y
Gorham, E. D., Garland, C. F., Garland, F. C., Grant, W. B., Mohr, S. B., Lipkin, M., … & Holick, M. F. (2007). Optimal vitamin D status for colorectal cancer prevention: a quantitative meta-analysis. American journal of preventive medicine, 32(3), 210-216.
Hewitson, P., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L., Towler, B., & Watson, E. (2007). Screening for colorectal cancer using the fecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (1).
Holt, C. L., Wynn, T. A., Southward, P., Litaker, M. S., Jeames, S., & Schulz, E. (2009). Development of a spiritually-based educational intervention to increase informed decision-making for prostate cancer screening among church-attending African American men. Journal of health communication, 14(6), 590-604.
Hurwitz, L. M., Michels, K. A., Cook, M. B., Pfeiffer, R. M., & Trabert, B. (2021). Associations between daily aspirin use and cancer risk across strata of major cancer risk factors in two large U.S. cohorts. Cancer Causes & Control, 32(1), 57. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10552-020-01357-2
Issa, I. A., & Noureddine, M. (2017). Colorectal cancer screening: An updated review of the available options. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 23(28), 5086-5096. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i28.5086
Issaka, R. B., Avila, P., Whitaker, E., Bent, S., & Somsouk, M. (2019). Population health interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical tests: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 118, 113-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.10.021
Keum, N., & Giovannucci, E. (2019). Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 16(12), 713-732.
Kim, E. K., Kim, H. E., Han, K., Kang, B. J., Sohn, Y. M., Woo, O. H., & Lee, C. W. (2018). Applying data-driven imaging biomarker in mammography for breast cancer screening: a preliminary study. Scientific reports, 8(1), 1-8.
Kim, K., Polite, B., Hedeker, D., Liebovitz, D., Randal, F., Jayaprakash, M., Quinn, M., Lee, S. M., & Lam, H. (2020). Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol. Implementation Sci, 15, 96. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01045-4
Knudsen, M. D., Wang, L., Wang, K., Wu, K., Ogino, S., Chan, A. T., Giovannucci, E., & Song, M. (2021). Changes in Lifestyle Factors After Endoscopic Screening: A Prospective Study in the United States. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2021.07.014
Kushi, L. H., Doyle, C., McCullough, M., Rock, C. L., Demark‐Wahnefried, W., Bandera, E. V., … & American Cancer Society 2010 Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. (2012). American Cancer Society Guidelines on nutrition and physical activity for cancer prevention: reducing the risk of cancer with healthy food choices and physical activity. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 62(1), 30-67.
Labianca, Roberto, Giordano D. Beretta, Basem Kildani, Laura Milesi, Federica Merlin, Stefania Mosconi, M. Adelaide Pessi et al. “Colon cancer.” Critical reviews in oncology/hematology 74, no. 2 (2010): 106-133.
Levy, B. T., Daly, J. M., Xu, Y., Crockett, S. D., Hoffman, R. M., Dawson, J. D., Parang, K., Shokar, N. K., Reuland, D. S., Zuckerman, M. J., & Levin, A. (2021). Comparative effectiveness of five fecal immunochemical tests using colonoscopy as the gold standard: study protocol. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 106. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.cct.2021.106430
Ma, W., Wang, K., Nguyen, L. H., Joshi, A., Cao, Y., Nishihara, R., Wu, K., Ogino, S., Giovannucci, E. L., Song, M., & Chan, A. T. (2021). Association of Screening Lower Endoscopy With Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Adults Older Than 75 Years. JAMA Oncology, 7(7), 985–992. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.1364
May, F. P., Yano, E. M., Provenzale, D., Steers, W. N., & Washington, D. L. (2017). The association between primary source of healthcare coverage and colorectal cancer screening among U.S. veterans. Digestive diseases and sciences, 62(8), 1923-1932.
Miller, S. J., Foran-Tuller, K., Ledergerber, J., & Jandorf, L. (2017). Motivational interviewing to improve health screening uptake: A systematic review. Patient Education and Counseling, 100(2), 190-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.08.027
Moyer, V. A. (2014). Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Annals of internal medicine, 160(5), 330-338.
Muthukrishnan, M., Arnold, L. D., & James, A. S. (2019). Patients’ self-reported barriers to colon cancer screening in federally qualified health center settings. Preventive medicine reports, 15, 100896.
Muthukrishnan, M., Sutcliffe, S., Hunleth, J. M., Wang, J. S., Colditz, G. A., & James, A. S. (2018). Conducting a randomized trial in rural and urban safety-net health centers: Added value of community-based participatory research. Contemp Clin Trials Commun, 6(10), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2018.02.005.
Myers, R., Stello, B., Sifri, R., Daskalakis, C., Hegarty, S., DiCarlo, M., Johnson, M., Careyva, B., Rivera, A., Shaak, K., Gordils-Molina, L., Gonzalez, E., Ortiz, R., & Diaz. (2019). Does decision support by phone increase colorectal cancer screening in Hispanic patients? Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). https://doi.org/10.25302/8.2019
Navarrete-Pak, J. (2016). Improving colorectal cancer screening in primary care (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).
Ochs-Balcom, H. M., Kanth, P., & Cannon-Albright, L. A. (2021). Early-onset colorectal cancer risk extends to second-and third-degree relatives. Cancer Epidemiology, 73. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.canep.2021.101973
Pender, N. J., Murdaugh, C. L., & Parsons, M. A. (2013). Health promotion in nursing practice: Pearson new international edition (6th ed.). Pearson. ISBN-13: 9781292054827
Ramdzan, A. R., Abd Rahim, M. A., Mohamad Zaki, A., Zaidun, Z. & Mohammed Nawi, A. (2019). Diagnostic accuracy of FOBT and colorectal cancer genetic testing: A systematic review & meta-analysis. Annals of Global Health, 85(1), 70. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.2466
Resnick, J. M., & Uphoff, T. (2015). Laboratory. Laboratory News, 38(6-MAY), 29.
Roth, J. A., Carter-Harris, L., Brandzel, S., Buist, D. S. M., Wernli, K. J. (2018). Cancer prevention and screening: the next step in the era of precision medicine. NPJ precision oncology, 3, 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-018-0075-9
Russell, G., Kunin, M., Harris, M., Levesque, J. F., Descôteaux, S., Scott, C., Lewis, V., Dionne, É., Advocat, J., Dahrouge, S., Stocks, N., Spooner, C., Haggerty, J., (2019). Improving access to primary healthcare for vulnerable populations in Australia and Canada: protocol for a mixed-method evaluation of six complex interventions. BMJ Open, 9(7), E027869. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027869
Saman, D. M., Chrenka, E. A., Harry, M. L., Allen, C. I., Freitag, L. A., Asche, S. E., Truitt, A. R., Ekstrom, H., O’Connor, P. J., Sperl-Hillen, J. M., Ziegenfuss, J. Y., & Elliott, T. E. (2021). The impact of personalized clinical decision support on primary care patients’ views of cancer prevention and screening: a cross-sectional survey. BMC Health Serv Res, 21, 592. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06551-9
Sharma, T. (2020). Analysis of the effectiveness of two non-invasive fecal tests used to screen for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults. Public Health, 182, 70–76. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.01.021
Shaukat, A., Dostal, A., Menk, J., & Church, T. R. (2017). BMI Is a Risk Factor for Colorectal Cancer Mortality. Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 62(9), 2511. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10620-017-4682-z
Stojadinovic, A., Bilchik, A., Smith, D., Eberhardt, J. S., Ward, E. B., Nissan, A., … & Steele, S. R. (2013). Clinical decision support and individualized prediction of survival in colon cancer: bayesian belief network model. Annals of surgical oncology, 20(1), 161-174.
Subramanian, S., Hoover, S., Tangka, F., DeGroff, A., Soloe, C. S., Arena, L. C., Schlueter, D. F., Joseph, D. A., & Wong, F. L. (2018). A conceptual framework and metrics for evaluating multicomponent interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening within an organized screening program. Cancer, 124(21), 4154-4162. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31686
Tinmouth, J., Patel, J., Austin, P. C., Baxter, N. N., Brouwers, M. C., Earle, C. C., Levitt, C., Lu, Y., MacKinnon, M., Paszat, L., & Rabeneck, L. (2020). Directly mailing gFOBT kits to previous responders being recalled for colorectal cancer screening increases participation. Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, 3(5), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwz012
Viramontes, O., Bastani, R., Yang, L., Glenn, B. A., Herrmann, A. K., & May, F. P. (2020). Colorectal cancer screening among Hispanics in the United States: Disparities, modalities, predictors, and regional variation. Preventive Medicine, 138. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106146
Wolf, A. M., Fontham, E. T., Church, T. R., Flowers, C. R., Guerra, C. E., LaMonte, S. J., & Smith, R. A. (2018). Colorectal cancer screening for average‐risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68(4), 250-281. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21457.
Yue, Y., Hur, J., Cao, Y., Tabung, F. K., Wang, M., Wu, K., Song, M., Zhang, X., Liu, Y., Meyerhardt, J. A., Ng, K., Smith-Warner, S. A., Willett, W. C., & Giovannucci, E. (2021). Prospective evaluation of dietary and lifestyle pattern indices with risk of colorectal cancer in a cohort of younger women. Annals of Oncology, 32(6), 778–786. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2021.03.200
Zhou, L., Ampon-Wireko, S., Asante Antwi, H., Xu, x., Salman, M., Opuni Antwi, M., Tordzro, M., Afua., N. (2020). An empirical study on the determinants of health care expenses in emerging economies. BMC Health Serv Res 20, 774. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05414-z
Time is precious
don’t waste it!