Search

Background: Increasing participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is the most efficient and cost-effective way of reducing mortality associated with colorectal cancer by detecting and treating early-stage disease. Currently, only 44% of Australians aged 50-74 years complete the NBCSP. This efficacy trial aims to test whether this SMS intervention is an effective method for increasing participation in the NBCSP. Furthermore, a process evaluation will explore the barriers and facilitators to sending the SMS from general practice.Methods: We will recruit 20 general practices in the western region of Victoria, Australia to participate in a cluster randomised controlled trial. General practices will be randomly allocated with a 1:1 ratio to either a control or intervention group. Established general practice software will be used to identify patients aged 50 to 60 years old who are due to receive a NBCSP kit in the next month. The SMS intervention includes GP endorsement and links to narrative messages about the benefits of and instructions on how to complete the NBCSP kit. It will be sent from intervention general practices to eligible patients prior to receiving the NBCSP kit. We require 1400 eligible patients to provide 80% power with a two-sided 5% significance level to detect a 10% increase in CRC screening participation in the intervention group compared to the control group. Our primary outcome is the difference in the proportion of eligible patients who completed a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) between the intervention and control group for up to 12 months after the SMS was sent, as recorded in their electronic medical record (EMR). A process evaluation using interview data collected from general practice staff (GP, practice managers, nurses) and patients will explore the feasibility and acceptability of sending and receiving a SMS to prompt completing a NBCSP kit.Discussion: This efficacy trial will provide initial trial evidence of the utility of an SMS narrative intervention to increase participation in the NBCSP. The results will inform decisions about the need for and design of a larger, multi-state trial of this SMS intervention to determine its cost-effectiveness and future implementation.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620001020976 . Registered on 17 October 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice. We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50-70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin.Methods: Approximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50-70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial). There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points.Discussion: This trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50-70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases.Trial Registration: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965 . Registered on 10 October 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The public health concern represented by eye injury in Victoria, Australia has been known for a period now approaching 20 years. However, there has been no improvement observed in this public health concern since it was first identified in the 1990s. This study further investigates the epidemiology of eye injury in Victoria, specifically hospital-admitted eye injury. Methods: The Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset was surveyed for eye injury coded by the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision during the period spanning 2001–2005, retrieving all cases of hospital-admitted eye injury in Victoria during the surveyed period. Results: During the period surveyed, the average incidence of eye injury requiring hospital admission in Victoria was 53.6 per 100 000 person-years. Sixty-four per cent of patients were male and 36% were female ( P < 0.001). Male patients were most commonly middle-aged compared with female patients who were most commonly middle-aged to elderly ( P < 0.001). Core patient groups included: elderly women sustaining eye injuries as a result of falls (particularly in residential homes); middle-aged men sustaining eye injuries as a result of assault and in transport-related accidents. Conclusion: The incidence of hospital-admitted eye injury in Victoria has increased since it was first identified as a concern in the 1990s. The design and implementation of an effective preventative strategy to reduce the rate of hospital-admitted eye injury in Victoria presents as a difficult task given that the most common causes are represented by falls, assault and transport-related accidents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Eye injury causes significant morbidity and is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. This study investigates the incidence, spectrum and patterns of eye injury presenting to a rural hospital in Victoria, Australia. Methods: A retrospective review of the medical records of all patients presenting with eye injury to the emergency department of Mildura Base Hospital, Victoria, Australia in year 2004 was conducted. As the emergency department of Mildura Base Hospital also acts as the outpatient department for this hospital, the series included all patients treated for eye injury at Mildura Base Hospital in year 2004, including admissions. Results: There were 435 patients present to Mildura Base Hospital emergency department for eye injury in 2004, which represented approximately 1% of the population of Mildura. The majority of eye injuries were superficial. Fifty-six (13%) patients required specialist attention. Most patients were male (83%) and were middle-aged. The most common locations where eye injuries took place were residential homes (47%) and workplaces (32%). The most common causes of eye injuries were trade tools and machinery (47%), followed by chemicals (12%) and branches/sticks/twigs (11%). Of particular concern for Mildura is that approximately one-quarter of the patients treated at Mildura Base Hospital for eye injury in 2004 had been treated at Mildura Base Hospital for a separate episode of eye injury in the past. Conclusion: Eye injuries represent a significant socioeconomic burden. This research contributes to the knowledge required for the design and implementation of effective preventative strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Australian guidelines recommend that people aged 50-70 years consider taking low-dose aspirin to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC)., Aim: To determine the effect of a consultation with a researcher before an appointment in general practice using a decision aid presenting the benefits and harms of taking low-dose aspirin compared with a general CRC prevention brochure on patients' informed decision making and low-dose aspirin use., Design and Setting: Individually randomised controlled trial in six general practices in Victoria, Australia, from October 2020 to March 2021., Method: Participants were recruited from a consecutive sample of patients aged 50-70 years attending a GP. The intervention was a consultation using a decision aid to discuss taking aspirin to reduce CRC risk while control consultations discussed reducing CRC risk generally. Self-reported co-primary outcomes were the proportion of individuals making informed choices about taking aspirin at 1 month and on low-dose aspirin uptake at 6 months, respectively. The intervention effect was estimated using a generalised linear model and reported with Bonferroni-adjusted 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P -values., Results: A total of 261 participants (86% of eligible patients) were randomised into trial arms ( n = 129 intervention; n = 132 control). Of these participants, 17.7% ( n = 20/113) in the intervention group and 7.6% ( n = 9/118) in the control group reported making an informed choice about taking aspirin at 1 month, an estimated 9.1% (95% CI = 0.29 to 18.5) between-arm difference in proportions (odds ratio [OR] 2.47, 97.5% CI = 0.94 to 6.52, P = 0.074). The proportions of individuals who reported taking aspirin at 6 months were 10.2% ( n = 12/118) of the intervention group versus 13.8% ( n = 16/116) of the control group, an estimated between-arm difference of -4.0% (95% CI = -13.5 to 5.5; OR 0.68 [97.5% CI = 0.27 to 1.70, P = 0.692])., Conclusion: The decision aid improved informed decision making but this did not translate into long-term regular use of aspirin to reduce CRC risk. In future research, decision aids should be delivered alongside various implementation strategies., (© The Authors.)

Background: We developed a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool ('CRISP') to provide individualised risk-based advice for colorectal cancer screening. Using known environmental, behavioural, and familial risk factors, CRISP was designed to facilitate tailored screening advice to patients aged 50 to 74 years in general practice. In parallel to a randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool, we developed and evaluated an evidence-based implementation strategy., Methods: Qualitative methods were used to explore the implementation of CRISP in general practice. Using one general practice in regional Victoria, Australia, as a 'laboratory', we tested ways to embed CRISP into routine clinical practice. General practitioners, nurses, and operations manager co-designed the implementation methods with researchers, focussing on existing practice processes that would be sustainable. Researchers interviewed the staff regularly to assess the successfulness of the strategies employed, and implementation methods were adapted throughout the study period in response to feedback from qualitative interviews. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) underpinned the development of the interview guide and intervention strategy. Coding was inductive and themes were developed through consensus between the authors. Emerging themes were mapped onto the CFIR domains and a fidelity checklist was developed to ensure CRISP was being used as intended., Results: Between December 2016 and September 2019, 1 interviews were conducted, both face-to-face and via videoconferencing (Zoom). All interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded. Themes were mapped onto the following CFIR domains: (1) 'characteristics of the intervention': CRISP was valued but time consuming; (2) 'inner setting': the practice was open to changing systems; 3. 'outer setting': CRISP helped facilitate screening; (4) 'individual characteristics': the practice staff were adaptable and able to facilitate adoption of new clinical processes; and (5) 'processes': fidelity checking, and education was important., Conclusions: These results describe a novel method for exploring implementation strategies for a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool in the context of a parallel RCT testing clinical efficacy. The study identified successful and unsuccessful implementation strategies using an adaptive methodology over time. This method emphasised the importance of co-design input to make an intervention like CRISP sustainable for use in other practices and with other risk tools., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Australia and New Zealand have the highest incidence rates of colorectal cancer worldwide. In Australia there is significant unwarranted variation in colorectal cancer screening due to low uptake of the immunochemical faecal occult blood test, poor identification of individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer, and over-referral of individuals at average risk for colonoscopy. Our pre-trial research has developed a novel Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) tool, which could be used to implement precision screening in primary care. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II multi-site individually randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool in primary care., Methods: This trial aims to test whether a standardised consultation using the CRISP tool in general practice (the CRISP intervention) increases risk-appropriate colorectal cancer screening compared to control participants who receive standardised information on cancer prevention. Patients between 50 and 74 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner for any reason, will be invited into the trial. A total of 732 participants will be randomised to intervention or control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice. The primary outcome (risk-appropriate screening at 12 months) will be measured using baseline data for colorectal cancer risk and objective health service data to measure screening behaviour. Secondary outcomes will include participant cancer risk perception, anxiety, cancer worry, screening intentions and health service utilisation measured at 1, 6 and 12 months post randomisation., Discussion: This trial tests a systematic approach to implementing risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening in primary care, based on an individual's absolute risk, using a state-of-the-art risk assessment tool. Trial results will be reported in 2020., Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12616001573448p . Registered on 14 November 2016.

Objective: To assess whether knowledge of insurance implications influenced uptake of genetic testing by participants in a research study of the causes of colorectal cancer., Design, Setting and Participants: Analysis of uptake of genetic testing by participants in the population-based Victorian Colorectal Cancer Family Study during two periods: from 1999 to 2003, when participants were not informed of any potential effect of genetic testing conducted during the study on their eligibility for new insurance policies; and from 2003 to 2006, when the protocol was changed to provide participants with information on the potential effect of genetic testing on insurance eligibility., Main Outcome Measure: Uptake of genetic testing for germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes at a family cancer clinic., Results: The proportion of participants who declined genetic testing among those informed of insurance implications was more than double the proportion among those without this knowledge (29/59 [49%] v 9/47 [19%]; P = 0.002). This difference could not be explained statistically by adjusting for measured putative predictors., Conclusion: Identification of people with a mutation in an MMR gene has clinical importance, and such screening may be a cost-effective way to reduce the burden of colorectal cancer in the community. If people are choosing not to obtain genetic information because of how it will affect their eligibility for insurance, reforms to existing insurance practices are indicated.

Colorectal cancers arising from serrated polyps are characterized by the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) and somatic mutation (V600E) in the BRAF proto-oncogene. Few epidemiologic studies have investigated risk factors for these tumors. We conducted a cohort study of 41,328 residents of Melbourne, Australia that included 9,939 participants of southern European origin and 31,389 of Anglo-Celtic origin. Colorectal adenocarcinomas were identified from population-based cancer registries. BRAF V600E mutation in tumors was determined using a PCR-based allelic discrimination method. Tumors were classified as CIMP positive when at least three of five markers (RUNX3, CACNA1G, SOCS1, NEUROG1, and IGF2) were methylated according to MethyLight analysis. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated by Cox regression with adjustment for risk factors for colorectal cancer. During follow-up, 718 participants were diagnosed with colorectal cancer. CIMP assays were done for 579 and BRAF V600E mutation testing for 582. After adjustment for other risk factors, when compared with people of Anglo-Celtic origin, those of southern European origin had lower incidence of colorectal cancer that had CIMP (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.67) or BRAF mutations (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.58) but similar incidence of colorectal cancer without CIMP (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.05) or BRAF (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.11). People of southern European origin had lower risk of colorectal cancers with CIMP and BRAF mutation than people of Anglo-Celtic origin, which may in part be due to genetic factors that are less common in people of southern European origin.