Affiliations
AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
Engaging primary care physicians is critical in the screening and diagnosis of colorectal cancer at safety-net hospital systemsKatrina Dimaano et al. Surg Open Sci. 2023.
doi: 10.1016/j.sopen.2023.12.001. eCollection 2024 Jan. AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
AbstractBackground: Primary care physicians (PCP) play a key role in offering colorectal cancer (CRC) screenings, particularly amongst underserved populations. Given potential delays in or omission of CRC screening in the absence of a PCP, we aimed to determine stage of CRC at diagnosis in an underserved population.
Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at two Los Angeles County safety-net hospitals. Inclusion criteria were a CRC diagnosis between 2018 and 2021 and age between 50 and 75 years at diagnosis time. The primary outcome was the cancer stage at diagnosis.
Results: A total of 373 patients were included, of those, 52.5 % had a PCP. Compared to others, PCP was similar in age, racial composition, and primary spoken language (Table 1). Of patients with a PCP, 52.0% were diagnosed by screening. After screening, the most common indication for colonoscopy were blood per rectum (24.9 %) and imaging findings (18.0 %). Patients with a PCP had a significantly lower rate of late stage CRC than those without a PCP (42.4 % vs. 68.0 %, p < 0.001). After adjustment, having a PCP was associated with significantly reduced odds of late stage CRC (Adjusted Odds Ratio 0.83, 95 % Confidence Interval [0.68-1.04]). Having a PCP was not associated with any adjusted increase in number of adenomas or tumor size.
Conclusions: Patients with a PCP, irrespective of undergoing screening, were diagnosed at earlier CRC stages. This underlines the crucial role of PCPs in CRC and diagnosis, reinforcing the need for their active involvement in these processes.
Keywords: Colorectal Cancer; Primary care physician; Screening.
© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Conflict of interest statementThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
FiguresFig. 1
CONSORT diagram of study population.
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram of study population.
Fig. 1CONSORT diagram of study population.
Similar articlesHalm EA, Beaber EF, McLerran D, Chubak J, Corley DA, Rutter CM, Doubeni CA, Haas JS, Balasubramanian BA. Halm EA, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Oct;31(10):1190-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3760-9. Epub 2016 Jun 8. J Gen Intern Med. 2016. PMID: 27279097 Free PMC article.
Scharf T, Hügli C, Martin Y, Tal K, Biller-Andorno N, Dvořák C, Bulliard JL, Ducros C, Selby K, Auer R. Scharf T, et al. Prev Med Rep. 2023 Feb 13;32:102140. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102140. eCollection 2023 Apr. Prev Med Rep. 2023. PMID: 36865393 Free PMC article.
Momplaisir F, Long JA, Badolato G, Brady KA. Momplaisir F, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Aug;27(8):940-4. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2010-z. Epub 2012 Feb 28. J Gen Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 22370768 Free PMC article.
Ananthakrishnan AN, Hoffmann RG, Saeian K. Ananthakrishnan AN, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Nov;25(11):1164-71. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1457-z. Epub 2010 Jul 24. J Gen Intern Med. 2010. PMID: 20658268 Free PMC article.
Cooper K, Squires H, Carroll C, Papaioannou D, Booth A, Logan RF, Maguire C, Hind D, Tappenden P. Cooper K, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2010 Jun;14(32):1-206. doi: 10.3310/hta14320. Health Technol Assess. 2010. PMID: 20594533 Review.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3