Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Colorectal Cancer Screening Quality, Cost and Practice in an Era of Healthcare Transformation

  • Review
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening is the largest single source of income for gastroenterologists in the USA. Despite its proven value in preventing colon cancer, it is being scrutinized by payers and regulators as a high-volume procedure with variable quality, cost and documentation. In a rapidly evolving era of reimbursement for added value (high quality, affordable cost) rather than for individual transactions/volume, gastroenterologists are under pressure to change our practices to respond to the demands of the marketplace. Excellent guidance is available through our professional societies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Flexner A. Medical education in the United States and Canada: a report to the Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2010. http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/sites/default/files/elibrary/Carnegie_Flexner_Report.pdf.

  2. Skidmore M. Social Security and Its Enemies. Boulder: Westview Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brotman M. The new era of health care delivery: can gastroenterologists survive and thrive? GI & Hepatology News. 2013:19.

  4. Hudes BK. Larger practice groups cost more. GI & Hepatology News Correspondence. 2013:18.

  5. Margolis P, Groman R. The impact of changing federal policies on physician reimbursement. 2014. http://www.gastro.org/education-meetings/live-meetings/impact-of-changing-policies-on-physician-reimbursement-webinar.

  6. Lee TH, Cosgrove T. Engaging doctors in the health care revolution. Harvard Business Review. 2014;92(6):104–111.

  7. Making physicians pay off. Hospitals struggle to balance current costs with future benefits of employing docs. Modern Healthcare, 2014. Healthcare business news. http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20140222/MAGAZINE/302229986. Accessed July 1, 2014.

  8. Paying till it hurts. A case study in high costs. The $2.7 Trillion Medical Bill. Colonoscopies Explain why U.S. leads the world in health expenditures. The New York Times 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/health/paying-till-it-hurts.html?_r=0. Accessed May 28, 2014.

  9. Secretive panel uses data to boost doctors’ pay. Bangor Daily News. Health. 2013. http://bangordailynews.com/2013/07/21/health/how-a-secretive-panel-uses-data-to-boost-doctors-pay/. Accessed October 3, 2013.

  10. Bitter Pill: why medical bills are killing us. Time, 2013 Health Care. http://time.com/198/bitter-pill-why-medical-bills-are-killing-us/.

  11. Allen JI. Personal Communication.

  12. Sinsky CA, Dugdale DC. Medicare payment for cognitive vs procedural care mending the gap. JAMA Intern Med Health Care Reform. 2013;173:1733–1737.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rustgi AK, Vender RJ, Wang KK. The efficacy of screening colonoscopy. 2014. Letter to the Editor. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hospital Employment of Cardiologists Triples, ACC Survey Finds. Medscape Multispecialty 2012. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/770731. Accessed July 1, 2014.

  15. Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS. Quality indicators for colonoscopy 2014. Gastrointest Endosc Am J Gastroenterol (in press).

  16. Impact of Changing Policies on Physician Reimbursement. AGA Institute, 2014. http://www.gastro.org/education-meetings/live-meetings/impact-of-changing-policies-on-physician-reimbursement-webinar.

  17. Rex DK, Kahi CJ, Levin B, Smith RA, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1872–1885.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Allen JI. The road ahead: what if GIs were accountable for preventing CRC? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:204–207.

  19. Braden GL, Allen JI. Organizing your clinical service line: colon cancer prevention. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:612–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McCoy AB, Melton GB, Wright A, et al. Clinical decision support for colon and rectal surgery: an overview. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2013;1:23–30.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Peery AF, Dellon ES, Lund J, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal disease in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:1179–1187.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Singh H, Nugent Z, Demers AA, et al. The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010;139:1128–1137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rex DK, Rahmani EY, Haseman JH, et al. Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:17–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Baxter N, Sutradhar R, Forbes DD, et al. Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Gasteroenterology. 2011;140:65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rabeneck L, Paszat LF, Saskin R. Endoscopist specialty is associated with incident colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:275–279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Baxter NN, Warren JL, Barrett MJ, et al. Association between colonoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality in a US cohort according to site of cancer and colonoscopists specialty. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2664–2669.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Massl R, van Putten PG, Steyergert EW, et al. Comparing quality, safety, and costs of colonoscopies performed by nurse vs physician trainees. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12(3):470–477.

  28. Carethers JM. DNA testing and molecular screening for colon cancer. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12:377–381.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1287–1297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cooper GS, Kou TD, Sloan B, et al. Use of colonoscopy for polyp surveillance in medicare beneficiaries. Cancer. 2013;119:1800–1807.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR, et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1298–1306.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. c/o Sutter Health, 633 Folsom Street, First Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94107, USA

    Martin Brotman

Authors
  1. Martin Brotman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Brotman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brotman, M. Colorectal Cancer Screening Quality, Cost and Practice in an Era of Healthcare Transformation. Dig Dis Sci 60, 692–697 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3447-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3447-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation