/
Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical cytology results Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical cytology results

Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical cytology results - PowerPoint Presentation

danika-pritchard
danika-pritchard . @danika-pritchard
Follow
392 views
Uploaded On 2017-01-27

Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical cytology results - PPT Presentation

Tom Garvey BS M2 Ann Evensen MD Helen Luce DO Two main types Adenocarcinoma Squamous cell carcinoma Asymptomatic Develop slowly Risk factors Cervical Cancer Cytology High sensitivity ID: 514379

care patients intervention steps patients care steps intervention patient cancer follow cervical communication post results clinic adherence verona wausau

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Improving follow-up to abnormal cervical cytology results

Tom Garvey, BS, M2

Ann

Evensen

, MD

Helen Luce, DOSlide2

Two main typesAdenocarcinoma

Squamous

cell carcinomaAsymptomaticDevelop slowlyRisk factors

Cervical CancerSlide3

CytologyHigh sensitivity

Conventional glass slide

Liquid-based cytologyASCUS, ASC-H, LGSIL, HGSIL, AIS, AGUSHPV Testing

Cervical Cancer Screening

Normal vs. Abnormal Cervical CellsSlide4

Histology: Colposcopy

Visual examination

BiopsyHigh specificityCIN-1, 2, or 3; CancerExcisional Procedures

Loop Electrosurgical Excision

Procedure (LEEP)

Cold cone excision

Next Steps

LEEPSlide5

ASCCP – algorithms for cytological and histological results

4

Clinical Best PracticesSlide6

Barriers to screening Imperfect tests

Loss of follow-up to abnormal results

Patient factors

Provider error

Special challenges at residency clinics

Current LimitationsSlide7

Intervention

Results

Telephone

counseling on psychological

concerns/barriers

Improves initial and long-term adherence

Educational

brochure/pamphlet

Improves

adherence

Electronic tracking

system

Improves adherence

Family physician involvement in follow-up

Improves adherence

Result reminder letters from cytologist to physician

Improves adherence, especially with older patientsFraming of result messages to patientNot shown to be effectiveEconomic ReimbursementImproves adherence in disadvantaged patients

Interventions to Improve AdherenceSlide8

Hypothesis

Using an

electronic tracking system to manage patients with abnormal cervical cytology will

improve both communication

of next steps to the patient and

patient adherence

with these steps at two family medicine residency clinics Slide9

Data sources

:

UW-Verona Family Medicine ClinicUW-Wausau Family Medicine ClinicTimeframes:Index Pap

Pre-intervention: 11/2005 - 11/2007

Post-intervention: 11/2008 - 11/2010

Intervention

SpreadsheetScoring care:

Follow ASCCP guidelines (3 month window)

Early testing appropriate

Extra vigilant care appropriate

MethodsSlide10

If appropriate care took place, assumed communication was appropriateInappropriate steps

Review communication

Attribute loss of follow-up (patient or provider)Scoring stopped after an inappropriate stepReferrals appropriateTransfer of care

Adolescents excluded from post-intervention results

MethodsSlide11

Patient Recruitment Flowchart – Pre-Intervention - Verona

72 Patients

5 Patients Excluded

4 History Questions

1 Chart Incomplete

67 PatientsSlide12

Patient Recruitment Flowchart – Pre-Intervention - Wausau

62 Patients

9 Patients Excluded

6 Care Transferred

2 Index Pap not at Clinic

1 Chart Incomplete

53 PatientsSlide13

Las

Patient Recruitment Flowchart – Post-Intervention - Verona

127 Patients

23 Patient Excluded

13 Adolescents

9 Care Transferred

1

Superceding

Provider Judgment

104 PatientsSlide14

Las

Patient Recruitment Flowchart – Post-Intervention - Wausau

77 Patients

8 Patients Excluded

5 Care Transferred

3 Adolescents

69 PatientsSlide15

Patient Care:

Percentage of follow-up steps that were appropriate

Provider Communication: Percentage of follow-up steps that had correct provider communicationSignificance of Results:

analyzed with Fisher’s test

Data Analysis Slide16

Results: Appropriate Care By Clinic

Key: V – Verona

W - Wausau

# of Steps with Appropriate Care

# of Steps with Delayed

or Absent Care

Percent

of Steps with Appropriate Care

Clinic

V

W

V

W

V

W

Pre-intervention

82

76

27

24

75.2%

76.0%

Post-intervention

133

76

31

23

81.1%

76.8%

Improvement:

5.9%

P=0.29

0.8%

P=1Slide17

Results: Provider Communication By Clinic

Key: V – Verona

W - Wausau

# of Steps where Patient Received

Adequate Communication

# of Steps

where Patients Received Either No or Erroneous Communication

Percent

of Steps with Adequate Communication

Clinic

V

W

V

W

V

W

Pre-intervention

93

87

16

13

85.3%

87.0%

Post-intervention

153

89

8

10

95.0%

89.9%

Improvement:

9.7%

P=0.0082

2.9%

P=0.66Slide18

Study not completeChallenges:

Change in ASCCP guidelines

Implementation of EMRDifficulty in judging communication of next stepsClinicians not interpreting algorithms correctly, especially post-

colposcopy

follow-up

Next Steps

Continue spreadsheet useTrack remaining patientsProvider EducationIntervention Tailoring: Initiating incentives, paying for care or transportation, informational brochures

Discussion: Slide19

Ann Evensen, MD - project advisor

Anna Hendrickson, RN – project member

Laura Kutzke – program coordinatorHelen Luce, DO – project advisorClarissa

Renken

, DO – project member

Mark Shapleigh – clinic manager

Jon Temte, MD,PhD – program director

AcknowledgementsSlide20

American Cancer Society - Cancer Facts & Figures 2009. At: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@nho/documents/document/500809webpdf.pdf (Accessed July 13th 2010).

Parkin

, DM, Pisani, P,

Ferlay

, J. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J

Clin

1999; 49:33.National Cancer Institute – Current Research: Health Disparities: Cervical Cancer. At: http://dceg.cancer.gov/research/healthdisparities/cervical (Accessed July 13th 2010).

American Society for

Colposcopy

and Cervical Pathology – Consensus Guidelines: 2006. At: http://www.asccp.org/pdfs/consensus/algorithms_cyto_07.pdf (Accessed July 13th 2010).

References