In a large observational cohort, FIB-4 was good at differentiating 5 stages of chronic HCV infection. It can be useful in screening patients who need biopsy and therapy, for monitoring patients with less advanced disease, and for longitudinal studies.

IMPORTANCE Approximately 24 million US individuals receive care at federally qualified health centers, which historically have low rates of colorectal cancer screening. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine colorectal cancer screening for individuals aged 50 to 75 years. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach program implemented in health centers as part of standard care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cluster randomized pragmatic clinical trial was conducted in 26 federally qualified health center clinics, representing 8 health centers in Oregon and California, randomized to intervention (n = 13) or usual care (n = 13). All participants were overdue for colorectal cancer screening during the accrual interval (February 4, 2014 to February 3, 2015). INTERVENTIONS Electronic health record-embedded tools to identify eligible adults and to facilitate implementation of a stepwise mailed intervention involving (1) an introductory letter, (2) a mailed FIT, and (3) a reminder letter; training, collaborative learning, and facilitation through a practice improvement process. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Effectiveness was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who completed a FIT, and secondarily, any colorectal cancer screening within 12 months of accrual or by August 3, 2015. Implementation was measured as clinic-level proportions of adults who were mailed an introductory letter and ordered a FIT. RESULTS Twenty-six clinics with 41 193 adults (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [6.3] years; 22 994 women) were randomized to receive the direct mail colorectal screening intervention (13 clinics; 21 134 patients) or usual care (13 clinics; 20 059 patients). Compared with usual care clinics, intervention clinics had significantly higher adjusted clinic-level proportion of participants who completed a FIT (13.9% vs 10.4%; difference, 3.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%) and any colorectal cancer screening (18.3% vs 14.5%; difference, 3.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6%-7.0%). We observed large variation across health centers in effectiveness (FIT completion differences range, −7.4 percentage points to 17.6 percentage points) and implementation (proportion who were mailed a FIT range, 6.5% to 68.2%). The number needed to mail to achieve a completed FIT was 4.8 overall, and 4.0 in clinics that mailed a FIT reminder. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE An EHR-embedded mailed FIT outreach intervention significantly improved rates of FIT completion and rates of any colorectal cancer screening. Higher rates of colorectal cancer screening occurred in clinics that successfully implemented the mailed outreach program. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01742065

BackgroundThe Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends multi-component interventions, including patient reminders, to improve uptake of colorectal cancer screening.ObjectiveWe sought to compare the effectiveness of different forms of reminders for a direct-mail fecal immunochemical test (FIT) program.DesignPatient-randomized controlled trial.Participants2772 adults aged 50–75, not up to date with colorectal cancer screening recommendations, with a clinic visit in the previous year at any of four participating health center clinics.InterventionParticipants were mailed an introductory letter and FIT. Those who did not complete their FIT within 3 weeks were randomized to receive (1) a reminder letter, (2) two automated phone calls, (3) two text messages, (4) a live phone call, (5) a reminder letter and a live phone call, (6) two automated phone calls and a live phone call, or (7) two text messages and a live phone call. Patients with a patient portal account were sent two email reminders, but were not randomized.Main MeasuresFIT return rates for each group, 6 months following randomization.Key ResultsA total of 255 (10%) participants returned their FIT within 3 weeks of the mailing. Among randomized participants (n = 2010), an additional 25.5% returned their FITs after reminders were delivered (estimated overall return rate = 32.7%). In intention-to-treat analysis, compared to the group allocated to receive a reminder letter, return rates were higher for the group assigned to receive the live phone call (OR = 1.51 [1.03–2.21]) and lower for the group assigned to receive text messages (OR = 0.66 [0.43–0.99]). Reminder effectiveness differed by language preference.ConclusionsOur data suggest that FIT reminders that included a live call were more effective than reminders that relied solely on written communication (a text message or letter).Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov/ctc2/show/NCT01742065.

Background The Senior Walking Environmental Assessment Tool (SWEAT), an instrument for measuring built environmental features associated with physical activity of older adults, was revised to create an easier-to-use tool for use by practitioners and community members. Methods Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of the modified instrument (SWEAT-R) was assessed in Portland, Oregon in 2007. Five trained observers audited street segments in 12 neighborhoods, resulting in 361 pairs of audits, including 63 repeated audits. Results Overall, 88% and 75% of items assessed had good or excellent inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, respectively. The revised instrument required less time to complete than the original instrument, while obtaining more information. Conclusion SWEAT-R provides easy to gather, reliable data for use in community-based audits of built environment in relation to walking among older adults.

Social isolation among individuals ages 65 years and older is associated with poor health outcomes. However, little is known about health care utilization patterns of socially isolated individuals. This retrospective, observational study evaluated associations between social isolation and hospital and emergency department (ED) utilization among Medicare patients ages 65 years and older. In a cohort of 18,557 Medicare members age 65 years and older at Kaiser Permanente Northwest, the authors compared rates of hospitalization and ED visits in the 12 months following a baseline survey between respondents who reported feeling lonely or socially isolated and those who did not, controlling for demographic and health variables and utilization in the 12 months prior to the survey. Statistical analysis was conducted in February 2020. In adjusted models, those who reported ''sometimes'' experiencing social isolation were more likely to have at least 1 hospital admission (odds ratio [OR sometimes ]: 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.35, P = 0.04), than those who ''rarely'' or ''never'' experienced social isolation. Those who experienced social isolation ''sometimes'' or ''often/always'' were more likely to have at least 1 ED visit (OR sometimes : 1.28, 95% CI: 1.15-1.41, P < 0.0001, and OR often/always : 1.51, 95% CI: 1.25-1.84, P < 0.0001, respectively) than those who ''rarely'' or ''never'' experienced social isolation. These findings suggest that self-reported social isolation may be predictive of future hospital admissions and ED utilization. Research is needed to determine how addressing social isolation needs within the health care system affects health care utilization and health outcomes.

As the USA increases the use of EHR, surveillance using ICD-9 codes may be reliable to determine the burden of chronic HBV infection and would be useful to improve reporting by state and local health departments.

Less than two-thirds of persons with a positive HCV antibody test had a follow-up RNA test. Rapid ascertainment of HCV infection status with reflex testing to RNA is critical to identify persons eligible for treatment.

Our findings highlight importance of better capture of past screening events in the EHR. While the need for better population-based data is not unique to CRC screening, it provides an important example of the use of population-based data not only for tracking care, but also for delivering interventions.