ArticleBMJ open quality2018
Faecal immunochemical testing implementation to increase colorectal cancer screening in primary care.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs: a systematic narrative review.Primary health care research & development · 2024Pooled it
- Patient preferences and perceived barriers to follow-up care in a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program: a national survey.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Comparison of quality performance metrics in screening and surveillance colonoscopy: a single-center experience.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Multi-faceted strategies to advance health equity in colorectal cancer screening in primary care setting: quality improvement project.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Implementing an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Lessons Learned From an Academic-Community Practice.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Advancing health equity in improving breast cancer screening with the use of a mobile mammography bus in marginalised population: quality improvement project.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- How pharmacists would design and implement a community pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program.Preventive oncology & epidemiology · 2024Article
- 'I'm a bit of a champion for it actually': qualitative insights into practitioner-supported self-collection cervical screening among early adopting Victorian practitioners in Australia.Primary health care research & development · 2023Article
- Exploring Why Financial Incentives Fail to Affect At-home Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Mixed Methods Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Disparities in outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer in proximity to an emergency department visit.Scientific reports · 2022Observational
- Patient Navigation After Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test Results Increases Diagnostic Colonoscopy and Highlights Multilevel Barriers to Follow-Up.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Article
- Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Article
- Team-Based Primary Care Practice Transformation Initiative and Changes in Patient Experience and Recommended Cancer Screening Rates.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in USA, and CRC screening remains suboptimal. The aim of this quality improvement was to increase CRC screening in the internal medicine clinic (IMC) patients, between the ages of 50-75 years, from a baseline rate of 50%-70% over 12 months with the introduction of faecal immunochemical test (FIT) testing. We used the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) method and performed a root cause analysis to identify barriers to acceptance of CRC screening. The quality improvement team created a driver diagram to identify and prioritise change ideas. We developed a process flow map to optimise opportunities to improve CRC screening. We performed eight PDSA cycles. The major components of interventions included: (1) leveraging health information technology; (2) optimising team work, (3) education to patient, physicians and IMC staff, (4) use of patient navigator for tracking FIT completion and (5) interactive workshops for the staff and physicians to learn motivational interview techniques. The outcome measure included CRC screening rates with either FIT or colonoscopy. The process measures included FIT order and completion rates. Data were analysed using a statistical process control and run charts. Four hundred and seven patients visiting the IMC were offered FIT, and 252 (62%) completed the test. Twenty-two (8.7%) of patients were FIT positive, 14 of those (63.6%) underwent a subsequent diagnostic colonoscopy. We achieved 75% CRC screening with FIT or colonoscopy within 12 months and exceeded our goal. Successful strategies included engaging the leadership, the front-line staff and a highly effective multidisciplinary team. For average-risk patients, FIT was the preferred method of screening. We were able to sustain a CRC screening rate of 75% during the 6-month postproject period. Sustainable annual FIT is required for successful CRC screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.