Investigators have determined that knowing which patient populations are following cancer screening guidelines may be beneficial to public health officials, policymakers, and researchers developing strategies to improve screening adherence, according to a recent study published by Bhattacharyya et al in BMC Medical Research Methodology.
Background
Unlike electronic health records—which typically contain information from a single health-care setting or system—health information exchange data comes from numerous sources. A report of an individual’s screening at a facility in a health-care system different from where primary care is received may not make it into an electronic health record but could be included in the data available from a health information exchange.
Study Methods and Results
In the new study, the investigators compared the use of health information exchange data with patient self-reported data. They found that completeness of information differed depending on the data source and screening test.
Health information exchange data provided more information than patient self-reported data regarding laboratory screening tests such as the fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer and the human papillomavirus test for cervical cancer, whereas patient self-reported data provided more information than health information exchange data regarding cancer screening procedures such as colonoscopies or mammograms. The investigators discovered that the most robust measurement approach involved collecting both health information exchange and patient self-reported screening information to draw upon their strengths.
Conclusions
The investigators suggested that more complete population data over time and detailing cancer screenings across populations—broken down by geographic area, racial or ethnic groups, or age range—may help researchers, public health officials, and policymakers gain a more nuanced understanding of how many patients within each population are receiving recommended screenings, which screenings they are receiving, and at what intervals. This information can then inform targeted outreach efforts to improve the cancer screening rates across all patient populations.
“We need to help [patients] keep track of whether they are receiving services that may benefit their health and be aware of when those services come due [as well as] to make sure that [those] who are eligible are being offered them. In the case of cancer screenings, our clinical goal is to increase the likelihood of detecting … cancer early at a time when it could be treated more successfully than if it were detected later without screening,” emphasized senior study author David Haggstrom, MD, MAS, of the Regenstrief Institute at the Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center and the Indiana University School of Medicine. “Our study was uniquely possible due to the data infrastructure created by the Regenstrief Institute and managed by the Indiana Health Information Exchange to better support the health of residents of Indiana,” concluded Dr. Haggstrom.
The investigators noted that health information exchanges in other states are in various stages of development, comprehensiveness, and completeness.
Disclosure: The research in this study was supported by a National Cancer Institute supplement to an Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center grant. For full disclosures of the study authors, visit bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com.
