Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=1,256 Randomized Single-blind Health Services Research

Effectiveness of Electronic Health Record-Based Interventions for Improving Follow-Up in Primary Care

Colon Cancer · Lung Cancer · Prostate Cancer

Enrolled (actual)
1,256
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Feb 2016
Primary outcome: Primary: Differences in Time to Documented Follow-up of a Red Flag Suggestive of Cancer — 104; 200; 144; 192 Days — p=<0.05

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Contact Intervention (Behavioral)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Baylor College of Medicine
Primary completion
Aug 2012

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Differences in Time to Documented Follow-up of a Red Flag Suggestive of Cancer
104; 200; 144; 192; 65; 93 <0.05 sig
SECONDARY
Percentage of Patients Receiving Timely Follow-up of a Red Flag Suggestive of Cancer
73.4; 52.2
SECONDARY
Percentage of Cases With no Documented Justification for no Follow-up
33.9; 48.0
SECONDARY
Number of Participants Diagnosed With Cancer After Delay in Diagnostic Evaluation
13; 10
SECONDARY
Trigger Positive Predictive Value
63.5; 55.3

Summary

Diagnostic delays in ambulatory care are often due to breakdowns of related care processes. Electronic systems can improve follow-up and reduce delays by detecting missed appointments or incomplete procedures so that patients are called back to conduct timely investigations when appropriate. To achieve high standards of patient safety in cancer diagnosis, the investigators not only need to use information technology appropriately but also improve the processes, policies, and procedures of monitoring, communication, and coordination of care. Given the importance of cancer-related diagnostic delays in ambulatory care, the investigators need effective methods to detect them, understand their causes, and intervene to reduce them. Manual techniques to detect these delays, such as spontaneous reporting and random chart reviews, have limited effectiveness. Our proposed study focuses on testing methods to proactively identify delays using certain "triggers" as they occur and intervene in a timely manner.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

All primary care providers at both study sites who agree to be in the study. Intervention will be performed on those whose patients are electronically identified to have suspected cancer defined as presence of any predefined clue for cancer that is not followed-up in a timely manner. Three cancers are included; colorectal, lung and prostate and their clues include • chest x-imaging suspicious for malignancy • suspected or confirmed iron deficiency anemia • positive FOBT • hematochezia • abnormal PSA Patients will be selected from the data warehouse .

Exclusion Criteria

Primary care providers who do not wish to be in the study.

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01346839). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search