Kelly R Bates, Norah N Zaza, Dominic J Vitello, Hannah Bentrem, Steven J Stryker, Rajesh N Keswani, Charles D Logan
{"title":"Low Rates of Digital Rectal Exam in an Academic Health System Represent a Missed Opportunity.","authors":"Kelly R Bates, Norah N Zaza, Dominic J Vitello, Hannah Bentrem, Steven J Stryker, Rajesh N Keswani, Charles D Logan","doi":"10.1002/jso.28160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Digital rectal exam (DRE) is an important screening tool for early cancer identification. DRE has become less routinely performed following removal from cancer screening guidelines. The effect of this decreased utilization has not been studied; this study sought to evaluate current DRE utilization and changes over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic medical record database of a regional academic health system was assessed between 2015 and 2020 for encounters with patients aged 45-75. DRE rates and yearly trends were assessed using chi-squared and Cochran-Armitage tests, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 191 329 outpatient encounters, DRE was documented on 8.5% of visits. DRE utilization declined from 2015 to 2020 (9.6% vs. 8.9%). DRE was more often identified as a procedure in surgical specialties, including surgical oncology (55.6%) and general surgery (2.8%), compared to primary care specialties, including family medicine (1.7%) and internal medicine (1.6%). DREs were less frequently documented for non-Hispanic Black patients versus non-Black patients (7.2% vs. 8.4%) and for Hispanic patients versus Non-Hispanic White patients (7.6% vs. 8.5%). Men had a documented DRE procedure more frequently than women overall (10.4% vs. 4.6%) and in encounters with primary care specialties (2.3% vs. 0.5%) and surgical specialties (20.4% vs. 13.5%) (all p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this contemporary evaluation, DRE was less frequently coded during outpatient clinic visits overall and specifically in primary care compared with surgical specialties. Differences in DRE utilization across sociodemographic factors highlight disparities in cancer screening. Low DRE rates represent a missed opportunity for early identification of high prevalence cancers.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.28160","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Digital rectal exam (DRE) is an important screening tool for early cancer identification. DRE has become less routinely performed following removal from cancer screening guidelines. The effect of this decreased utilization has not been studied; this study sought to evaluate current DRE utilization and changes over time.
Methods: The electronic medical record database of a regional academic health system was assessed between 2015 and 2020 for encounters with patients aged 45-75. DRE rates and yearly trends were assessed using chi-squared and Cochran-Armitage tests, respectively.
Results: Of 191 329 outpatient encounters, DRE was documented on 8.5% of visits. DRE utilization declined from 2015 to 2020 (9.6% vs. 8.9%). DRE was more often identified as a procedure in surgical specialties, including surgical oncology (55.6%) and general surgery (2.8%), compared to primary care specialties, including family medicine (1.7%) and internal medicine (1.6%). DREs were less frequently documented for non-Hispanic Black patients versus non-Black patients (7.2% vs. 8.4%) and for Hispanic patients versus Non-Hispanic White patients (7.6% vs. 8.5%). Men had a documented DRE procedure more frequently than women overall (10.4% vs. 4.6%) and in encounters with primary care specialties (2.3% vs. 0.5%) and surgical specialties (20.4% vs. 13.5%) (all p < 0.001).
Conclusions: In this contemporary evaluation, DRE was less frequently coded during outpatient clinic visits overall and specifically in primary care compared with surgical specialties. Differences in DRE utilization across sociodemographic factors highlight disparities in cancer screening. Low DRE rates represent a missed opportunity for early identification of high prevalence cancers.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.