Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33573698›Full record

ArticleIsrael journal of health policy research2021

Barriers to completing colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test.

Revital Azulay, Liora Valinsky, Fabienne Hershkowitz, Einat Elran, Natan Lederman, Revital Kariv, Benjamin Braunstein, Anthony Heymann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Israel journal of health policy research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effect of Bowel Preparation to Colonoscopy Interval on Preparation Quality and Colonoscopy Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Revital AzulayMeuhedet Health Care, 5 Pesach Lev, Lod, Israel. azulay_revital@meuhedet.co.il.
Liora ValinskyPublic Health Nursing, Ministry of Health, Jerusalem, Israel.
Fabienne HershkowitzMeuhedet Health Care, 5 Pesach Lev, Lod, Israel.
Einat ElranMaccabi Healthcare Services, Tel aviv, Israel.
Natan LedermanMeuhedet Health Care, 5 Pesach Lev, Lod, Israel.
Revital KarivMaccabi Healthcare Services, Tel aviv, Israel.
Benjamin BraunsteinMaccabi Healthcare Services, Tel aviv, Israel.
Anthony HeymannMeuhedet Health Care, 5 Pesach Lev, Lod, Israel.
Clalit Health Services · ILIsrael Ministry of Health · ILTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Early detection and treatment are essential. Screening using fecal occult blood tests has increased significantly, but adherence to colonoscopy follow-up is suboptimal, increasing CRC mortality risk. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to colonoscopy following a positive FOBT at the level of the patient, physician, organization and policymakers.

methodsThis mixed methods study was conducted at two health care organizations in Israel. The study included retrospective analyses of 45,281 50-74 year-old members with positive fecal immunochemical tests from 2010 to 2014, and a survey of 772 patients with a positive test during 2015, with and without follow-up. The qualitative part of the study included focus groups with primary physicians and gastroenterologists and in-depth interviews with opinion leaders in healthcare.

resultsPatient lack of comprehension regarding the test was the strongest predictor of non-adherence to follow-up. Older age, Arab ethnicity, and lower socio economic status significantly reduced adherence. We found no correlation with gender, marital status, patient activation, waiting time for appointments or distance from gastroenterology clinics. Primary care physicians underestimate non-adherence rates. They feel responsible for patient follow-up, but express lack of time and skills that will allow them to ensure adherence among their patients. Gastroenterologists do not consider fecal occult blood an effective tool for CRC detection, and believe that all patients should undergo colonoscopy. Opinion leaders in the healthcare field do not prioritize the issue of follow-up after a positive screening test for colorectal cancer, although they understand the importance.

conclusionsWe identified important barriers that need to be addressed to improve the effectiveness of the screening program. Targeted interventions for populations at risk for non-adherence, specifically for those with low literacy levels, and better explanation of the need for follow-up as a routine need to be set in place. Lack of agreement between screening recommendations and gastroenterologist opinion, and lack of awareness among healthcare authority figures negatively impact the screening program need to be addressed at the organizational and national level.

trial registrationThis study was approved by the IRB in both participating organizations (Meuhedet Health Care Institutional Review Board #02-2-5-15, Maccabi Healthcare Institutional Review Board BBI-0025-16). Participant consent was waived by both IRB's.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsOccult BloodAgedColonoscopyEarly Detection of CancerHumansIsraelRetrospective StudiesAdherenceCancerColonoscopyPositive colorectal cancer screening

Identifiers

PMID33573698
PMCPMC7879608
OpenAlexW3128527904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.