A Cluster Randomized Trial of a Family Health History Platform to Identify and Manage Patients at Increased Risk for Colorectal Cancer.
A Cluster Randomized Trial of a Family Health History Platform to Identify and Manage Patients at Increased Risk for Colorectal Cancer.
复制标题
家庭健康史平台的整群随机试验，用于识别和管理结直肠癌风险增加的患者。
DOI：
10.1007/s11606-022-07787-9
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
Goldstein,Karen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Voils,CorrineI;Coffman,CynthiaJ;Wu,RRyanne;Grubber,JanetM;Fisher,DeborahA;Strawbridge,ElizabethM;Sperber,Nina;Wang,Virginia;Scheuner,MarenT;Provenzale,Dawn;Nelson,RichardE;Hauser,Elizabeth;Orlando,LoriA;Goldstein,Karen
BackgroundObtaining comprehensive family health history (FHH) to inform colorectal cancer (CRC) risk management in primary care settings is challenging.ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of a patient-facing FHH platform to identify and manage patients at increased CRC risk.DesignTwo-site, two-arm, cluster-randomized, implementation-effectiveness trial with primary care providers (PCPs) randomized to immediate intervention versus wait-list control.ParticipantsPCPs treating patients at least one half-day per week; patients aged 40–64 with no medical conditions that increased CRC risk.InterventionsImmediate-arm patients entered their FHH into a web-based platform that provided risk assessment and guideline-driven decision support; wait-list control patients did so 12 months later.Main MeasuresMcNemar’s test examined differences between the platform and electronic medical record (EMR) in rates of increased risk documentation. General estimating equations using logistic regression models compared arms in risk-concordant provider actions and patient screening test completion. Referral for genetic consultation was analyzed descriptively.Key ResultsSeventeen PCPs were randomized to each arm. Patients (n= 252 immediate,n= 253 control) averaged 51.4 (SD = 7.2) years, with 83% assigned male at birth, 58% White persons, and 33% Black persons. The percentage of patients identified as increased risk for CRC was greater with the platform (9.9%) versus EMR (5.2%), difference = 4.8% (95% CI: 2.6%, 6.9%),p< .0001. There was no difference in PCP risk-concordant action [odds ratio (OR) = 0.7, 95% CI (0.4, 1.2;p= 0.16)]. Among 177 patients with a risk-concordant screening test ordered, there was no difference in test completion, OR = 0.8 [0.5,1.3];p= 0.36. Of 50 patients identified by the platform as increased risk, 78.6% immediate and 68.2% control patients received a recommendation for genetic consultation, of which only one in each arm had a referral placed.ConclusionsFHH tools could accurately assess and document the clinical needs of patients at increased risk for CRC. Barriers to acting on those recommendations warrant further exploration.Trial Registration NumberClinicalTrials.gov NCT02247336 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02247336
