Person: Fletcher, Robert
Loading...
Email Address
AA Acceptance Date
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
Fletcher
First Name
Robert
Name
Fletcher, Robert
8 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
Publication Failure of Automated Telephone Outreach With Speech Recognition to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening(American Medical Association (AMA), 2010) Simon, Steven; Zhang, Fang; Soumerai, Stephen; Ensroth, Arthur; Bernstein, Lydia; Fletcher, Robert; Ross-Degnan, DennisBackground Automated telephone outreach with speech recognition (ATO-SR) is used extensively by health plans. Whether ATO-SR can increase rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is unknown. Methods We randomly allocated 40 000 health plan members to ATO-SR and 40 000 to usual care, of whom 10 432 and 10 506 in the intervention and usual care groups, respectively, had not been previously screened and were therefore eligible for analysis. The intervention was a single interactive outreach call using speech recognition to engage participants in conversation about the importance of CRC screening and options for and barriers to screening. The intervention directed participants to contact their primary care provider to schedule screening. The primary end point was any CRC screening in the year following intervention. Colonoscopy in the year following intervention was a secondary outcome. Results The incidence of any CRC screening was 30.6% in the intervention group and 30.4% in the usual care group (P = .76). After adjustment for available covariates, there remained no intervention effect (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.07). A total of 21.4% of members in the intervention group and 20.3% in the usual care group underwent colonoscopy (P = .04). In multivariate analysis, there was a small intervention effect on colonoscopy (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.16). Conclusions This study showed that ATO-SR failed to improve rates of CRC screening. Future studies should examine approaches that combine efforts to target patients and their health care providers to overcome the barriers to CRC screening.Publication Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status and Use of Colonoscopy in an Insured Population – A Retrospective Cohort Study(Public Library of Science, 2012) Doubeni, Chyke A.; Jambaulikar, Guruprasad D.; Fouayzi, Hassan; Robinson, Scott B.; Gunter, Margaret J.; Field, Terry S.; Roblin, Douglas W.; Fletcher, RobertBackground: Low-socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Screening with colonoscopy, the most commonly used test in the US, has been shown to reduce the risk of death from CRC. This study examined if, among insured persons receiving care in integrated healthcare delivery systems, differences exist in colonoscopy use according to neighborhood SES. Methods We assembled a retrospective cohort of 100,566 men and women, 50–74 years old, who had been enrolled in one of three US health plans for \(\geq\) 1 year on January 1, 2000. Subjects were followed until the date of first colonoscopy, date of disenrollment from the health plan, or December 31, 2007, whichever occurred first. We obtained data on colonoscopy use from administrative records. We defined screening colonoscopy as an examination that was not preceded by gastrointestinal conditions in the prior 6-month period. Neighborhood SES was measured using the percentage of households in each subject's census-tract with an income below 1999 federal poverty levels based on 2000 US census data. Analyses, adjusted for demographics and comorbidity index, were performed using Weibull regression models. Results: The average age of the cohort was 60 years and 52.7% were female. During 449,738 person-years of follow-up, fewer subjects in the lowest SES quartile (Q1) compared to the highest quartile (Q4) had any colonoscopy (26.7% vs. 37.1%) or a screening colonoscopy (7.6% vs. 13.3%). In regression analyses, compared to Q4, subjects in Q1 were 16% (adjusted HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.80–0.88) less likely to undergo any colonoscopy and 30%(adjusted HR = 0.70, CI: 0.65–0.75) less likely to undergo a screening colonoscopy. Conclusion: People in lower-SES neighborhoods are less likely to undergo a colonoscopy, even among insured subjects receiving care in integrated healthcare systems. Removing health insurance barriers alone is unlikely to eliminate disparities in colonoscopy use.Publication Measuring Access to Effective Care Among Elderly Medicare Enrollees in Managed and Fee-for-Service Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study(BioMed Central, 2001) Barton, Mary B; Dayhoff, Debra A; Soumerai, Stephen; Rosenbach, Margo L; Fletcher, RobertBackground: Our aim was to compare access to effective care among elderly Medicare patients in a Staff Model and Group Model HMO and in Fee-for-Service (FFS) care. Methods: We used a retrospective cohort study design, using claims and automated medical record data to compare achievement on quality indicators for elderly Medicare recipients. Secondary data were collected from 1) HMO data sets and 2) Medicare claims files for the time period 1994–95. All subjects were Medicare enrollees in a defined area of New England: those enrolled in two divisions of a managed care plan with different physician payment arrangements: a staff model, and a group model; and the Medicare FFS population. We abstracted information on indicators covering several domains: preventive, diagnosis-specific, and chronic disease care. Results: On the indicators we created and tested, access in the single managed care plan under study was comparable to or better than FFS care in the same geographic region. Percent of Medicare recipients with breast cancer screening was 36 percentage points higher in the staff model versus FFS (95% confidence interval 34–38 percentage points). Follow up after hospitalization for myocardial infarction was 20 percentage points higher in the group model than in FFS (95% confidence interval 14–26 percentage points). Conclusion: According to indicators developed for use in both claims and automated medical record data, access to care for elderly Medicare beneficiaries in one large managed care organization was as good as or better than that in FFS care in the same geographic area.Publication Effects of Deworming on Malnourished Preschool Children in India: An Open-Labelled, Cluster-Randomized Trial(Public Library of Science, 2008) Awasthi, Shally; Peto, Richard; Pande, Vinod K.; Fletcher, Robert; Read, Simon; Bundy, Donald A. P.Background: More than a third of the world's children are infected with intestinal nematodes. Current control approaches emphasise treatment of school age children, and there is a lack of information on the effects of deworming preschool children. Methodology: We studied the effects on the heights and weights of 3,935 children, initially 1 to 5 years of age, of five rounds of anthelmintic treatment (400 mg albendazole) administered every 6 months over 2 years. The children lived in 50 areas, each defined by precise government boundaries as urban slums, in Lucknow, North India. All children were offered vitamin A every 6 months, and children in 25 randomly assigned slum areas also received 6-monthly albendazole. Treatments were delivered by the State Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), and height and weight were monitored at baseline and every 6 months for 24 months (trial registration number NCT00396500). p Value calculations are based only on the 50 area-specific mean values, as randomization was by area. Findings: The ICDS infrastructure proved able to deliver the interventions. 95% (3,712/3,912) of those alive at the end of the study had received all five interventions and had been measured during all four follow-up surveys, and 99% (3,855/3,912) were measured at the last of these surveys. At this final follow up, the albendazole-treated arm exhibited a similar height gain but a 35 (SE 5)% greater weight gain, equivalent to an extra 1 (SE 0.15) kg over 2 years (99% CI 0.6–1.4 kg, p = 10\(^{−11}\)). Conclusions: In such urban slums in the 1990s, five 6-monthly rounds of single dose anthelmintic treatment of malnourished, poor children initially aged 1–5 years results in substantial weight gain. The ICDS system could provide a sustainable, inexpensive approach to the delivery of anthelmintics or micronutrient supplements to such populations. As, however, we do not know the control parasite burden, these results are difficult to generalize. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00396500Publication A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study(BioMed Central, 2009) Lasser, Karen E; Murillo, Jennifer; Medlin, Elizabeth; Lisboa, Sandra; Valley-Shah, Lisa; Fletcher, Robert; Emmons, Karen; Ayanian, JohnBackground: Colorectal cancer screening rates are low among poor and disadvantaged patients. Patient navigation has been shown to increase breast and cervical cancer screening rates, but few studies have looked at the potential of patient navigation to increase colorectal cancer screening rates. Methods: The objective was to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a patient navigator-based intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in community health centers. Patients at the intervention health center who had not been screened for colorectal cancer and were designated as "appropriate for outreach" by their primary care providers received a letter from their provider about the need to be screened and a brochure about colorectal cancer screening. Patient navigators then called patients to discuss screening and to assist patients in obtaining screening. Patients at a demographically similar control health center received usual care. Results: Thirty-one percent of intervention patients were screened at six months, versus nine percent of control patients (p < .001). Conclusion: A patient navigator-based intervention, in combination with a letter from the patient's primary care provider, was associated with an increased rate of colorectal cancer screening at one health center as compared to a demographically similar control health center. Our study adds to an emerging literature supporting the use of patient navigators to increase colorectal cancer screening in diverse populations served by urban health centers.Publication The Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer in Patients with Symptoms: Finding a Needle in a Haystack(BioMed Central, 2009) Fletcher, RobertPatients often see primary care physicians with symptoms that might signal colorectal cancer but are also common in adults without cancer. Physicians and patients must then make a difficult decision about whether and how aggressively to evaluate the symptom. Favoring referral is that missed diagnoses lead to unnecessary testing, prolonged uncertainty, and continuing symptoms; also, the physician will suffer chagrin. It is not clear that diagnostic delay leads to progression to a more advanced stage. Against referral is that proper evaluation includes colonoscopy, with attendant inconvenience, discomfort, cost, and risk. The article by Hamilton et al, published this month in BMC Medicine, provides strong estimates of the predictive value of the various symptoms and signs of colorectal cancer and show how much higher predictive values are with increasing age and male sex. Unfortunately, their results also make clear that most colorectal cancers present with symptoms with low predictive values, < 1.2%. Models that include a set of predictive variables, that is, risk factors, age, sex, screening history, and symptoms, have been developed to guide primary prevention and clinical decision-making and are more powerful than individual symptoms and signs alone. Although screening for colorectal cancer is increasing in many countries, cancers will still be found outside screening programs so primary care physicians will remain at the front line in the difficult task of distinguishing everyday symptoms from life-threatening cancer.Publication Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: A qualitative study(BioMed Central, 2008) Lasser, Karen E; Ayanian, John; Fletcher, Robert; Good, Mary-JoBackground: Colorectal cancer screening rates are low among disadvantaged patients; few studies have explored barriers to screening in community health centers. The purpose of this study was to describe barriers to/facilitators of colorectal cancer screening among diverse patients served by community health centers. Methods: We identified twenty-three outpatients who were eligible for colorectal cancer screening and their 10 primary care physicians. Using in-depth semi-structured interviews, we asked patients to describe factors influencing their screening decisions. For each unscreened patient, we asked his or her physician to describe barriers to screening. We conducted patient interviews in English (n = 8), Spanish (n = 2), Portuguese (n = 5), Portuguese Creole (n = 1), and Haitian Creole (n = 7). We audiotaped and transcribed the interviews, and then identified major themes in the interviews. Results: Four themes emerged: 1) Unscreened patients cited lack of trust in doctors as a barrier to screening whereas few physicians identified this barrier; 2) Unscreened patients identified lack of symptoms as the reason they had not been screened; 3) A doctor's recommendation, or lack thereof, significantly influenced patients' decisions to be screened; 4) Patients, but not their physicians, cited fatalistic views about cancer as a barrier. Conversely, physicians identified competing priorities, such as psychosocial stressors or comorbid medical illness, as barriers to screening. In this culturally diverse group of patients seen at community health centers, similar barriers to screening were reported by patients of different backgrounds, but physicians perceived other factors as more important. Conclusion: Further study of these barriers is warranted.Publication Effectiveness of screening colonoscopy in reducing the risk of death from right and left colon cancer: a large community-based study(BMJ Publishing Group, 2016) Doubeni, Chyke A; Corley, Douglas A; Quinn, Virginia P; Jensen, Christopher D; Zauber, Ann G; Goodman, Michael; Johnson, Jill R; Mehta, Shivan J; Becerra, Tracy A; Zhao, Wei K; Schottinger, Joanne; Doria-Rose, V Paul; Levin, Theodore R; Weiss, Noel S; Fletcher, RobertObjective: Screening colonoscopy's effectiveness in reducing colorectal cancer mortality risk in community populations is unclear, particularly for right-colon cancers, leading to recommendations against its use for screening in some countries. This study aimed to determine whether, among average-risk people, receipt of screening colonoscopy reduces the risk of dying from both right-colon and left-colon/rectal cancers. Design: We conducted a nested case–control study with incidence-density matching in screening-eligible Kaiser Permanente members. Patients who were 55–90 years old on their colorectal cancer death date during 2006–2012 were matched on diagnosis (reference) date to controls on age, sex, health plan enrolment duration and geographical region. We excluded patients at increased colorectal cancer risk, or with prior colorectal cancer diagnosis or colectomy. The association between screening colonoscopy receipt in the 10-year period before the reference date and colorectal cancer death risk was evaluated while accounting for other screening exposures. Results: We analysed 1747 patients who died from colorectal cancer and 3460 colorectal cancer-free controls. Compared with no endoscopic screening, receipt of a screening colonoscopy was associated with a 67% reduction in the risk of death from any colorectal cancer (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.33, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.52). By cancer location, screening colonoscopy was associated with a 65% reduction in risk of death for right-colon cancers (aOR=0.35, CI 0.18 to 0.65) and a 75% reduction for left-colon/rectal cancers (aOR=0.25, CI 0.12 to 0.53). Conclusions: Screening colonoscopy was associated with a substantial and comparably decreased mortality risk for both right-sided and left-sided cancers within a large community-based population.