Rejection of Fecal Immunochemical Tests Within the Lower Gastrointestinal Diagnostic Pathway: A Cohort Study.

IF 3 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Journal of Primary Care and Community Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/21501319241228161
Alex J Ball, Imran Aziz, Ravishankar B Sargur, Louise Merriman, Matthew Kurien
{"title":"Rejection of Fecal Immunochemical Tests Within the Lower Gastrointestinal Diagnostic Pathway: A Cohort Study.","authors":"Alex J Ball, Imran Aziz, Ravishankar B Sargur, Louise Merriman, Matthew Kurien","doi":"10.1177/21501319241228161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/objectives: </strong>The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) helps triage primary care patients at risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Improving FIT returns has received recent attention, however uncertainty exists regarding the accurate completion of samples provided for laboratory analysis. This study aims to identify the rejection rate of returned FIT samples and determine rejection causes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>FIT samples from symptomatic patients within South Yorkshire, Bassetlaw, and North Derbyshire are processed at a central laboratory. Tests requests are made from 225 GP practices, which serve an estimated 2 million population. This study describes a retrospective review of FIT samples received in the central laboratory between 01/09/19 and 31/12/22. Locally held data was interrogated in March 2023 to determine the number of FIT samples received and rejected during the study period. Documented reasons for rejection were explored to identify common themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total FIT specimens received during the study period was 126 422. Of these, 5190 (4.1%) were rejected. Monthly rejection rates fell from 17.4% in September 2019 to 1.3% in December 2022 (<i>P</i> < .001). Sampling errors were the most frequent cause for FIT rejection (2151/5190), with other causes including: expired specimen; no sample collection date/ time, no request form, incomplete patient information and illegible handwriting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the first study exploring FIT rejection rates in symptomatic primary care patients, which shows improvements in rejection rates over time. Targeted interventions could improve rejection rates further, thereby reducing NHS resource use and costs and diagnostic delays.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10865951/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319241228161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction/objectives: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) helps triage primary care patients at risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Improving FIT returns has received recent attention, however uncertainty exists regarding the accurate completion of samples provided for laboratory analysis. This study aims to identify the rejection rate of returned FIT samples and determine rejection causes.

Methods: FIT samples from symptomatic patients within South Yorkshire, Bassetlaw, and North Derbyshire are processed at a central laboratory. Tests requests are made from 225 GP practices, which serve an estimated 2 million population. This study describes a retrospective review of FIT samples received in the central laboratory between 01/09/19 and 31/12/22. Locally held data was interrogated in March 2023 to determine the number of FIT samples received and rejected during the study period. Documented reasons for rejection were explored to identify common themes.

Results: Total FIT specimens received during the study period was 126 422. Of these, 5190 (4.1%) were rejected. Monthly rejection rates fell from 17.4% in September 2019 to 1.3% in December 2022 (P < .001). Sampling errors were the most frequent cause for FIT rejection (2151/5190), with other causes including: expired specimen; no sample collection date/ time, no request form, incomplete patient information and illegible handwriting.

Conclusions: This is the first study exploring FIT rejection rates in symptomatic primary care patients, which shows improvements in rejection rates over time. Targeted interventions could improve rejection rates further, thereby reducing NHS resource use and costs and diagnostic delays.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在下消化道诊断途径中拒绝接受粪便免疫化学检验:队列研究。
导言/目的:粪便免疫化学检验(FIT)有助于对有结肠直肠癌(CRC)风险的初级保健患者进行分流。改善 FIT 返回情况最近受到了关注,但在准确完成提供给实验室分析的样本方面还存在不确定性。本研究旨在确定退回的 FIT 样品的拒收率,并确定拒收原因:方法:南约克郡、巴塞特劳(Bassetlaw)和北德比郡有症状患者的 FIT 样本由一家中心实验室处理。检验申请来自 225 家全科医生诊所,服务人口约 200 万。本研究对中心实验室在 19 年 9 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日期间收到的 FIT 样本进行了回顾性审查。研究人员于 2023 年 3 月查询了当地持有的数据,以确定研究期间收到和拒绝的 FIT 样本数量。对记录在案的拒收原因进行了探讨,以确定共同的主题:研究期间收到的 FIT 样本总数为 126422 份。结果:研究期间共收到 126422 份 FIT 标本,其中 5190 份(4.1%)被拒收。月拒绝率从 2019 年 9 月的 17.4% 降至 2022 年 12 月的 1.3%(P 结论:这是首次探讨 FIT 拒绝率的研究:这是首次对有症状的初级保健患者的 FIT 排斥率进行探讨的研究,结果表明随着时间的推移,排斥率有所改善。有针对性的干预措施可进一步提高拒绝率,从而减少 NHS 的资源使用、成本和诊断延误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
183
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and Predictors of Post-Acute COVID-19 Symptoms in Italian Primary Care Patients. Lessons Learned From a Community-Based Men's Health Fair. A Real-World Precision Medicine Program Including the KidneyIntelX Test Effectively Changes Management Decisions and Outcomes for Patients With Early-Stage Diabetic Kidney Disease. Emergency Department and Dental Clinic Perceptions of Appropriate, and Preventable, Use of the ED for Non-Traumatic Dental Conditions in Hot-Spot Counties: A Mixed Methods Study. Community Activities in Primary Care: A Literature Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1