Patient, clinician, and system-related barriers may affect adherence to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance programmes. The impact of a dedicated automated recall HCC surveillance programme on retention rates in patients eligible for screening is unknown. We aimed to describe and evaluate a large HCC surveillance programme in a publicly funded healthcare system.

Data were collected from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2022, from a retrospective cohort of subjects enrolled in a publicly funded automated recall semi-annual surveillance programme as per the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease HCC guidance in the Calgary Health Zone (~1.6 million), Canada. Patients were excluded if there was incomplete data or did not meet indications for surveillance. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of non-retention to surveillance.

A total of 7269 patients were included. The median was age 55.5 years (IQR: 45.5-63.8), 60% were male, 46% were of Asian descent, 51% had HBV infection, and 36% had cirrhosis (35% alcohol-related). Median follow-up was 4.9 years (IQR: 1.5-7.2). Overall, 52% (n = 3768) of patients were retained in the surveillance programme, while 8.3% (n = 603) left for potential medical reasons, and 40% (n = 2898) were lost in follow-up. The median time in the programme for those lost in follow-up was 0.81 years (IQR: 0.0-2.8) compared to 6.75 years if retained (IQR: 5.6-8.6; p < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, HCV aetiology (HR 1.41; CI 1.23-1.62, p < 0.01), African ethnicity (HR 1.20, CI 1.02-1.42, p = 0.03), and cirrhosis (HR 1.16, CI 1.05-1.28, p < 0.01) increased risk of dropout. On interaction analysis, Hepatitis B amongst cirrhotic patients also increased risk of dropout (HR 1.48, CI 1.05-2.07, p = 0.02).

A dedicated automated recall HCC surveillance programme has a high retention rate in a large multi-ethnic cohort of patients while identifying certain marginalised patient populations, such as those with viral liver disease, cirrhosis, or African ethnicity, as particularly vulnerable to loss to follow-up.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presents a significant global health challenge, particularly among individuals with liver cirrhosis, with hepatitis C (HCV) a major cause. In people with HCV-related cirrhosis, an increased risk of HCC remains after cure. HCC surveillance with six monthly ultrasounds has been shown to improve survival. However, adherence to biannual screening is currently suboptimal. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of increased HCC surveillance uptake and improved ultrasound sensitivity on mortality among people with HCV-related cirrhosis post HCV cure.

This study utilized mathematical modelling to assess HCC progression, surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment among individuals with cirrhosis who had successfully been treated for HCV. The deterministic compartmental model incorporated Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages to simulate disease progression and diagnosis probabilities in 100 people with cirrhosis who had successfully been treated for hepatitis C over 10 years. Four interventions were modelled to assess their potential for improving life expectancy: realistic improvements to surveillance adherence, optimistic improvements to surveillance adherence, diagnosis sensitivity enhancements, and improved treatment efficacy Results: Realistic adherence improvements resulted in 9.8 (95% CI 7.9, 11.6) life years gained per cohort of 100 over a 10-year intervention period; 17.2 (13.9, 20.3) life years were achieved in optimistic adherence improvements. Diagnosis sensitivity improvements led to a 7.0 (3.6, 13.8) year gain in life years, and treatment improvements improved life years by 9.0 (7.5, 10.3) years.

Regular HCC ultrasound surveillance remains crucial to reduce mortality among people with cured hepatitis C and cirrhosis. Our study highlights that even minor enhancements to adherence to ultrasound surveillance can significantly boost life expectancy across populations more effectively than strategies that increase surveillance sensitivity or treatment efficacy.

A set of indicators has been reported to measure the quality of care for cirrhotic patients, and previously published studies report variable adherence rates to these indicators. This study aimed to assess the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients before and after an educational intervention by determining its impact on adherence to quality indicators.

We conducted a quasi-experimental, cross-sectional study including 324 cirrhotic patients seen in 2017 and 2019 at a tertiary teaching hospital in Spain. Quality indicators were assessed in five domains: documentation of cirrhosis etiology, disease severity assessment, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening, variceal bleeding prophylaxis, and vaccination. After identifying areas for improvement, an educational intervention was implemented. A second evaluation was performed after the intervention to assess changes in adherence rates.

Before the intervention, adherence rates were excellent (>90%) for indicators related to variceal bleeding prophylaxis and documentation of cirrhosis etiology, acceptable (60-80%) for HCC screening and disease severity assessment, and poor (<50%) for vaccinations. After the educational intervention, there was a statistically significant improvement in adherence rates for eight indicators related to HCC screening (70-90%), disease severity assessment (90%), variceal bleeding prophylaxis (>90%), and vaccinations (60-90%).

Our study demonstrates a significant improvement in the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients after an educational intervention. The findings highlight the importance of targeted educational interventions to enhance adherence to quality indicators in the management of cirrhosis.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is most often a sequela of chronic liver disease or chronic hepatitis B infection. Among high-risk patients, surveillance for HCC every 6 months is recommended by international guidelines. However, rates of HCC surveillance are suboptimal (11-64%). Barriers at the patient, provider, and healthcare delivery system levels have been identified.

We performed a systemic scoping review to identify and characterize interventions to improve HCC surveillance that has previously been evaluated. Searches using key terms in PubMed and Embase were performed to identify studies examining interventions designed to improve the surveillance rate for HCC in patients with cirrhosis or chronic liver disease that were published in English between January 1990 and September 2021.

Included studies (14) had the following study designs: (1) randomized clinical trials (3, 21.4%), (2) quasi-experimental (2, 14.3%), (3) prospective cohort (6, 42.8%), and (4) retrospective cohort (3, 21.4%). Interventions included mailed outreach invitations, nursing outreach, patient education with or without printed materials, provider education, patient navigation, chronic disease management programs, nursing-led protocols for image ordering, automated reminders to physicians and nurses, web-based clinical management tools, HCC surveillance databases, provider compliance reports, radiology-led surveillance programs, subsidized HCC surveillance, and the use of oral medications. It was found that HCC surveillance rates increased after intervention implementation in all studies.

Despite improvements in HCC surveillance rates with intervention, compliance remained suboptimal. Further analysis of which interventions yield the greatest increases in HCC surveillance, design of multi-pronged strategies, and improved implementation are needed.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Surveillance for HCC is critical for early detection and treatment, but fewer than one-quarter of individuals at risk of HCC undergo surveillance. Multiple failures across the screening process contribute to the underutilization of surveillance, including limited disease awareness among patients and health-care providers, knowledge gaps, and difficulty recognizing patients who are at risk. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and alcohol-associated liver disease are the fastest-rising causes of HCC-related death worldwide and are associated with unique barriers to surveillance. In particular, more than one-third of patients with HCC related to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease do not have cirrhosis and therefore lack a routine indication for HCC surveillance on the basis of current practice guidelines. Semi-annual abdominal ultrasound with measurement of α-fetoprotein levels is recommended for HCC surveillance, but the sensitivity of this approach for early HCC is limited, especially for patients with cirrhosis or obesity. In this Review, we discuss the current status of HCC surveillance and the remaining challenges, including the changing aetiology of liver disease. We also discuss strategies to improve the utilization and quality of surveillance for HCC.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and is increasing in incidence in Australia. For most people with cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis B, HCC screening and surveillance is recommended with 6-monthly ultrasound. However, most patients with HCC are still diagnosed outside of surveillance with incurable disease. While HCC surveillance almost certainly reduces cancer-related mortality, the potential harms of surveillance are incompletely understood. Surveillance uptake remains suboptimal in many contexts, and stems from a combination of patient, clinician and system level barriers. Improved case-finding strategies may be required to identify high risk individuals in need of surveillance, as cirrhosis and viral hepatitis are often asymptomatic. HCC prediction models and novel surveillance tools such as biomarker panels, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging may have a future role in personalised HCC surveillance. Analyses suggest surveillance may be cost-effective, but Australian data remain limited. A centralised HCC surveillance program may ultimately have a role in delivering improved and more equitable care.

Hepatocellular carcinoma has a dismal prognosis, except in patients diagnosed early who are candidates for potentially curative therapies. Most HCC cases develop in patients with chronic liver disease. Therefore, expert society guidelines recommend surveillance every 6 months with ultrasound with or without serum alpha-fetoprotein for high-risk patients. However, fewer than 20% of patients in the USA undergo appropriate surveillance.

A systematic scoping review was performed with the objective of identifying barriers to screening among high-risk patients in the USA including mapping key concepts in the relevant literature, identifying the main sources and types of evidence available, and identifying gaps in the literature. A total of 43 studies published from 2007 to 2021 were included. Data were extracted and a conceptual framework was created.

Assessment of quantitative studies revealed poor surveillance rates, often below 50%. Three categories of barriers to surveillance were identified: patient-level, provider-level, and system-level barriers. Prevalent patient-level barriers included financial constraints, lack of awareness of surveillance recommendations, and scheduling difficulties. Common provider-level barriers were lack of provider awareness of guidelines for surveillance, difficulty accessing specialty resources, and time constraints in the clinic. System-level barriers included fewer clinic visits and rural/safety-net settings. Proposed interventions include improved patient/provider education, patient navigators, increased community/academic collaboration, and EMR-based reminders.

Based on these findings, there is a crucial need to implement and evaluate proposed interventions to improve HCC surveillance.

Patients with cirrhosis are advised to undergo hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance every 6 months. Routine surveillance is associated with early tumor detection and improved survival. However, surveillance is underutilized. We aimed to characterize the uptake of HCC surveillance in cirrhotic patients following the implementation of interventional programs. We performed a comprehensive literature search of major databases (from inception to October 2020). Surveillance was defined as having an abdominal sonogram every 6 months. Nine studies were included for meta-analysis which involved 4550 patients. The etiology of liver cirrhosis was largely due to hepatitis C or B (n=2023), followed by alcohol (n=857), and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (n=432). Patients enrolled in surveillance programs were 6 times more likely to undergo abdominal sonography when compared with standard of care (odds ratio=6.00; 95% confidence interval: 3.35-10.77). On subgroup analysis, clinical reminders were associated with a 4 times higher rate of HCC surveillance compared with standard of care (odds ratio=3.80; 95% confidence interval: 2.25-6.39). Interventional programs significantly improve the rate of HCC surveillance. This is clinically impactful and should be considered as a means for improving surveillance rates.

Quality metrics for inpatient cirrhosis management have been created to improve processes of care. We aimed to improve adherence to quality metrics by creating a novel clinical decision support (CDS) tool in the electronic health record (EHR).

We developed and piloted an alert system in the EHR that directs providers to a cirrhosis order set for patients who have a known diagnosis of cirrhosis or are likely to have cirrhosis. Adherence to process measures and outcomes when the CDS was used were compared with baseline performance before the implementation of the CDS.

The use of the order set resulted in a significant increase in adherence to process measures such as diagnostic paracentesis (29.6%-51.1%), low-sodium diet (34.3%-77.8%), and social work involvement (36.6%-88.9%) ( P < 0.001 for all). There were also significant decreases in both intensive care and hospital lengths of stay ( P < 0.001) as well as in-hospital development of infection ( P = 0.002). There was no difference in hospital readmissions at 30 or 90 days between the groups ( P = 0.897, P = 0.640).

The use of CDS in EHR-based interventions improves adherence to quality metrics for patients with cirrhosis and could easily be shared by institutions through EHR platforms. Further studies and larger sample sizes are needed to better understand its impact on additional outcome measures.

Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is known to be underutilized; however, neither the variation of surveillance adherence by cirrhosis etiology nor the patient-side economic burden of surveillance are well understood. To identify potential barriers to HCC surveillance, we assessed utilization patterns and costs among US patients with cirrhosis monitored in routine clinical practice.

We conducted a retrospective study of insured adult patients with cirrhosis using national administrative claims data from January 2013 through June 2019. Time up-to-date with recommended surveillance, correlates of surveillance receipt, and surveillance-associated costs were assessed during a ≥ 6-month follow-up.

Among 15,543 patients with cirrhosis (mean [SD] age 64.0 [11.1] years, 50.7% male), 45.8% and 58.7% had received any abdominal imaging at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Patients were up-to-date with recommended surveillance for only 31% of a median 1.3-year follow-up. Those with viral hepatitis were more likely to receive surveillance than those with other etiologies (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.11-2.17, p = .010 for patients without a baseline gastroenterologist [GI] visit and 2.69, 95% CI 1.77-4.09, p < .001 for patients with a GI visit, relative to those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and no GI visit). For all etiologies except NAFLD, the HR (95% CI) for surveillance receipt was higher among patients with vs without a baseline GI visit (alcohol-related, 1.164 [1.002-1.351] vs 0.880 [0.796-0.972]; viral hepatitis, 2.688 [1.765-4.093] vs 1.553 [1.111-2.171]; Other, 0.612 [0.519-0.722] vs 0.549 [0.470-0.641]). Mean total and patient-paid daily surveillance-related costs ranged from $540 and $113, respectively (ultrasound) to $1580 and $300, respectively (magnetic resonance imaging), and mean estimated patient productivity costs were $730-$2514 annually.

HCC surveillance was underutilized and was lowest among patients with nonviral etiologies and those who had not seen a gastroenterologist. Surveillance-related out-of-pocket expenses and lost productivity were substantial. The development of surveillance strategies that reduce patient burden, such as those using blood-based biomarkers, may help improve surveillance adherence and effectiveness.

This systematic literature review identified publications evaluating the role and benefits of nurse-led care in the management of patients with a diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. Structured searches of the PubMed database and the EMCare nursing and allied health database were conducted (August 11, 2021). Eligible publications were English-language, full-text, peer-reviewed journal articles featuring HCC and/or RCC populations, interventions involving nurses, any/no comparators, and reporting any related healthcare outcomes. Data on study design and size, patient characteristics and impact of nursing care were extracted.

Fifty-six relevant articles were identified (43 on HCC; 10 on RCC; 3 on HCC and RCC). The literature described the role and impact of oncology nurses across a variety of care functions, including in health promotion and screening, care coordination, holistic oversight, symptom and adverse event monitoring and management, and emotional support. Twenty-nine empirical studies/case reports were identified demonstrating benefit of nurse-led interventions in HCC/liver cancer (n = 28) and RCC (n = 1). Benefits were achieved through: improved patient participation in screening programs; reduced time to diagnosis; improved treatment adherence, reduced treatment complications, dose reductions and outpatient visits, and potential cost savings.

The oncology nurse plays a multifaceted role in the care of patients with HCC and RCC, but more evidence from nurse-led interventions is required to guide optimal multidisciplinary care of patients with these conditions.

Quality metrics and standardization has become critical as the Affordable Care Act mandates that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services change reimbursement from volume to a value-based system. While the most commonly used quality indicators are related to that of colonoscopy, quality metrics for other procedures and endoscopy units have been developed mainly by the American College of Gastroenterology and the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Data to show that these quality metrics, especially in the field of advanced endoscopy as well as in the era of COVID-19 pandemic, can improve patient outcomes, are anticipated.

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection is a significant risk factor for developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). As HCC is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, screening patients with CHB at a high risk for HCC is recommended in an attempt to improve these outcomes. However, the screening recommendations on who to screen and how often are not uniform. Identifying patients at the highest risk of HCC would allow for the best use of health resources. In this review, we evaluate the literature on screening patients with CHB for HCC, strategies for optimizing adherence to screening, and potential risk stratification tools to identify patients with CHB at a high risk of developing HCC.

Many economic evaluations of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screenings have been conducted; however, these vary substantially with regards to screening strategies, patient group, and setting. This review aims to report the current knowledge of the cost-effectiveness of screening and describe the published data.

We conducted a search of biomedical and health economic databases up to July 2020. We included full and partial health economic studies if they evaluated the costs or outcomes of HCC screening strategies.

The review included 43 studies. Due to significant heterogeneity in key aspects across the studies, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Most studies reported using ultrasound or alpha fetoprotein as screening strategies. Screening intervals were mostly annual or biannual. Incidence, diagnostic performance, and health state utility values were the most critical parameters affecting the cost-effectiveness of screening. The majority of studies reported HCC screening to be cost-effective, with the biannual ultrasound + alpha fetoprotein standing out as the most cost-effective strategy. However, few studies considered the utilization rate, and none considered the diagnostic performance of ultrasound in the context of central adiposity. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were also evaluated, but its cost-effectiveness was still controversial.

Although many studies suggested HCC screening was cost-effective, substantial limitations of the quality of these studies means the results should be interpreted with caution. Future modeling studies should consider the impact of central adiposity on the precision of ultrasound, real-world utilization rates and projections of increased HCC incidence.

Several types of audits have been used to promote quality improvement (QI) in hospital care. However, in-depth studies into the mechanisms responsible for the effectiveness of audits in a given context is scarce. We sought to understand the mechanisms and contextual factors that determine why audits might, or might not, lead to improved quality of hospital care.

A realist review was conducted to systematically search and synthesise the literature on audits. Data from individual papers were synthesised by coding, iteratively testing and supplementing initial programme theories, and refining these theories into a set of context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs).

From our synthesis of 85 papers, seven CMOcs were identified that explain how audits work: (1) externally initiated audits create QI awareness although their impact on improvement diminishes over time; (2) a sense of urgency felt by healthcare professionals triggers engagement with an audit; (3) champions are vital for an audit to be perceived by healthcare professionals as worth the effort; (4) bottom-up initiated audits are more likely to bring about sustained change; (5) knowledge-sharing within externally mandated audits triggers participation by healthcare professionals; (6) audit data support healthcare professionals in raising issues in their dialogues with those in leadership positions; and (7) audits legitimise the provision of feedback to colleagues, which flattens the perceived hierarchy and encourages constructive collaboration.

This realist review has identified seven CMOcs that should be taken into account when seeking to optimise the design and usage of audits. These CMOcs can provide policy makers and practice leaders with an adequate conceptual grounding to design contextually sensitive audits in diverse settings and advance the audit research agenda for various contexts.

CRD42016039882.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance is associated with early tumor detection and improved survival; however, it is often underused in clinical practice. We aimed to characterize surveillance use among patients with cirrhosis and the efficacy of interventions to increase surveillance.

We performed a systematic literature review using the MEDLINE database from January 2010 through August 2018 to identify cohort studies evaluating HCC surveillance receipt or interventions to increase surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. A pooled estimate for surveillance receipt with 95% confidence intervals was calculated. Correlates of surveillance use were defined from each study and prespecified subgroup analyses. Twenty-nine studies, with a total of 118,799 patients, met inclusion criteria, with a pooled estimate for surveillance use of 24.0% (95% confidence interval, 18.4-30.1). In subgroup analyses, the highest surveillance receipt was reported in studies with patients enrolled from subspecialty gastroenterology/hepatology clinics and lowest in studies characterizing surveillance in population-based cohorts (73.7% versus 8.8%, P < 0.001). Commonly reported correlates of surveillance included higher receipt among patients followed by subspecialists and lower receipt among those with alcohol-associated or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-related cirrhosis. All eight studies (n = 5,229) evaluating interventions including patient/provider education, inreach (e.g., reminder and recall systems), and population health outreach strategies reported significant increases (range 9.4%-63.6%) in surveillance receipt.

HCC surveillance remains underused in clinical practice, particularly among patients with alcohol-associated or NASH-related cirrhosis and those not followed in subspecialty gastroenterology clinics. Interventions such as provider education, inreach including reminder systems, and population health outreach efforts can significantly increase HCC surveillance.

Cirrhosis of the liver is increasing, with growing patient numbers in hospital outpatient departments, as well as increasing admissions due to decompensated liver disease. Decompensated cirrhosis of the liver is a common and debilitating illness causing disability, readmissions to hospital, and decreased quality of life, and can lead to liver cancer. The advent of the chronic liver disease nurse (CLDN) position in our hospital in 2009 was the first role in Australia dedicated to providing care to patients with cirrhosis. The role incorporates the care of patients with stable compensated disease, case management of patients with complications of decompensated disease, and hepatocellular carcinoma coordination. After a pilot randomized controlled trial and almost 10 years of service, this article describes the role of the CLDN and presents key performance indicators that will assist other centers considering introducing the role or elements of it into their service.

To assess the overall survival (OS) in those with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosed within a programmatic, centrally co-ordinated, regional screening programme.

A retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive HCC patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2013. Patients were followed up till death or end of study period (30 April 2015). A dedicated screening programme was commenced in 2009 to screen high-risk patients for HCC. Primary objective is to compare the OS between HCC patients diagnosed within the screening group versus those diagnosed outside this group. Other objectives were to compare tumour stage at diagnosis and the proportion having curative treatments in the two groups. Propensity score adjustments were performed to assess the survival benefit.

HCC was diagnosed in 130 subjects during the study period (82.3% males, median [IQR] age 62 [± 19] years and median [IQR] follow-up of 11.3 (± 23.5) months). Ninety-six patients (73.8%) died during the follow-up, and the median (95%CI) OS was 15.7 (9.7-21.8) months. HCC diagnosed within the screening programme had a better OS compared to those diagnosed outside this programme (26.8 vs 11.5 months, p = 0.01). Further, those diagnosed within the programme had an earlier stage HCC ([58.3% vs 23.6%], Ӽ² = 11.3, p = 0.001), and a significant proportion were treated with curative intent ([62.5% vs 31.1%], Ӽ² = 8.3, p = 0.004). Propensity score adjustment showed a 58% reduction in mortality for HCC diagnosed within the screening programme (HR [95%CI] 0.42 [0.20-0.89], p = 0.02).

A programmatic, regional HCC screening programme improved the OS and detected tumours at an earlier stage enabling more patients to have curative therapies.

Quality improvement (QI) identifies practical methods to improve patient care; however, it is not always widely known which QI methods are successful. We sought to create a primer of QI in gastroenterology for the practicing clinician.

We performed a systematic review of QI literature in gastroenterology. We included search terms for inflammatory bowel disease, irritable bowel syndrome, celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease, pancreatitis, liver disease, colorectal cancer screening, endoscopy, and gastrointestinal bleeding. We used general search terms for QI as well as specific terms to capture established quality metrics for each GI disease area.

We found 33 studies that met our definitions for QI. There were 17 studies of endoscopy including screening colonoscopy, six on liver disease, four on IBD, two on GERD, three on GI bleeding, and one on celiac disease. Education was the most common intervention, although most successful studies combined education with another intervention. Other effective interventions included retraining sessions to reach ADR goals in colonoscopy, nursing protocols to increase HCC screening, and EMR decision support tools to prompt reassessment of PPI therapy. Many studies showed improved compliance to metrics, but few were able to show differences in length of stay, readmissions, or mortality.

Our review of quality improvement literature in gastroenterology revealed common themes of successful programs: Education was frequently used but often insufficient, the EMR may be underutilized in guiding decision making, and patient-reported outcomes were infrequently assessed. Further research may be needed to compare QI strategies directly.

To investigate hepatocellular carcinoma screening utilisation and factors associated with utilisation among patients prescribed hepatitis B virus anti-viral therapy and at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma has increased in Australia over the past three decades with chronic hepatitis B virus infection a major contributor. hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance programs aim to detect cancers early enabling curative treatment options, longer survival and longer times to recurrence.

Multi-site cross-sectional survey.

An online study questionnaire was administered to eligible participants attending three Sydney tertiary hospitals. Data were grouped into six mutually exclusive hepatocellular carcinoma risk factor categories as per American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines. All analyses were undertaken in STATA. Logistic regression was used to assess the associations between covariates and screening utilisation. Multivariate models described were assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit.

Of the 177 participants, 137 (77.4%) self-reported that US had been performed in the last six months. Awareness that screening should be performed and knowing the correct frequency of US screening were independently associated with screening utilisation. Participants who knew that screening should be undertaken were three times more likely to have had pretreatment education or were prescribed hepatitis B virus anti-viral treatment for >4 years. Participants reporting a family history of hepatocellular carcinoma were less likely to know that screening should be undertaken every 6 months.

While utilisation of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance programs was higher in this study than in previous reports, strategies to further improve surveillance remain necessary.

Findings from this research form the basis for proposing strategies to improve utilisation of hepatocellular carcinoma screening, inform hepatitis B virus-related clinical practice and for the delivery of care and nursing education to people receiving hepatitis B virus anti-viral therapy and at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma.

The aim of this study was to investigate the quality of ultrasound (US) examinations for hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance under the Korean National Cancer Screening Program and to assess knowledge and experience about liver US of physicians who perform US examinations.

The investigation about the quality of liver US for hepatocellular carcinoma screening was based on the results of a nationwide quality assurance (QA) evaluation between 2012 and 2014 at all medical institutions participating in the National Cancer Screening Program. The QA evaluation was for personnel, equipment, education, and clinical images. Medical institutions with fewer than 60 of 100 points were considered to have failed the evaluation. Follow-up education in the form of a hands-on workshop was provided for physicians who worked in medical institutions that failed the QA evaluation. A questionnaire about basic knowledge and experience with US was administered during follow-up education.

After the QA evaluation, 542 of 685 hospitals and 1340 of 1985 private clinics passed the test. The evaluation of private clinics and hospitals showed substantial differences in the frequency of adequacy or mean scores between the pass and fail groups for all QA items, even requirements. Among 233 participants in the hands-on workshops, 187 physicians (80.2%) responded to the questionnaire. Results revealed that physicians had deficient knowledge and experience about liver US.

The quality of liver US for hepatocellular carcinoma screening remains suboptimal. Education for physicians who perform liver US examinations is unsatisfactory in Korea. We should make an effort to improve the quality of liver US and teach basic US techniques to physicians.

Patient adherence to screening for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is not well known. Our aims were to analyze the adherence to a surveillance program in a prospective cohort of cirrhotic patients and to examine its association with HCC stage at diagnosis.

A total of 770 patients with cirrhosis were examined semiannually by ultrasound and alpha-fetoprotein at a tertiary center. We collected data on 17 variables at baseline. Suboptimal adherence was defined as failure to complete 2 consecutive screening rounds.

Over a median follow-up period of 42.0 months (interquartile range: 60.0), 125 patients (16.2%) had suboptimal adherence. Active or previous intravenous drug use [hazard ratio (HR), 5.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.07-9.23], active alcohol consumption (HR, 3.03; 95% CI, 2.03-4.51), absence of liver decompensation before the inclusion in the program (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.07-2.55) and aspartate transaminase/alanine transaminase ratio ≥1.6 (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.23-2.70) were independent predictors of suboptimal adherence. Compared with those with optimal adherence, patients with suboptimal adherence had a more advanced HCC stage at diagnosis (P=0.015), they were less frequently treated with curative intention (P=0.078) and survived less (median: 14.2 mo; IQR: 36.0 vs. 22.7 mo; IQR: 47.4; P=0.160), although these differences were not significant.

The adherence to the process of HCC surveillance can be considered as adequate among cirrhotic patients. Active alcohol consumption and a history of intravenous drug use are the strongest predictors of suboptimal adherence. These patients have a more advanced HCC stage at diagnosis and tend to be less frequently treated with curative intention.

Quality indicators are the measurable components of clinical standards. Data are limited about the design and impact of interventions to improve quality indicators for patients with chronic liver disease.

A systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and conference proceedings was performed to find reports of quality improvement (QI) interventions. Data regarding the several indicators were collected. The search focused on vaccination against hepatitis A or hepatitis B virus, management of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, screening for varices, management of acute variceal hemorrhage, hepatocellular carcinoma screening, and 30-day readmissions.

Fifteen studies reported on the results of QI interventions. Ten focused on specific quality indicators (1 specific to vaccination, 2 spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, 3 gastrointestinal bleeding, and 4 hepatocellular carcinoma screening); 5 focused on clinical outcomes. Most studies used a pre-post study design. Interventions included checklists, educational conferences, electronic decision supports, nurse coordinators, and systematic changes to facilitate specialist co-management. Successful interventions optimized clinical workflow, closed knowledge gaps among frontline providers, created forced functions in the electronic ordering system, added dedicated staff to manage specific indicators, and provided viable alternatives to hospitalization to reduce readmission. Unsuccessful interventions included case management, phone calls, and home visits to reduce readmissions, checklists, and educational programs.

Past experience with QI provides generalizable rules for successful future interventions aimed at improved quality indicator adherence and patient outcomes.

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver cancer in patients with cirrhosis and is the leading cause of mortality in these patients. Despite existence of robust clinical practice guidelines for surveillance, diagnosis, and management for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the quality of care received by patients with HCC has been inconsistent. Several studies have reported disappointingly low surveillance rates in high-risk groups which likely contribute to most HCC cases being diagnosed at advanced stages. There is also data from large studies showing that significant under-referral to specialists and delay in initiation of treatment are linked to poor clinical outcomes. Given above circumstances, it is very important to perform studies which can identify areas in need of improvement in the care processes of HCC and design interventions to enhance quality of care. Unfortunately, data on validated quality indicators and quality metrics for HCC are non-existent. In this article, we review the existing literature pertaining to this issue and identify areas that need further research.

International guidelines recommend 6-monthly ultrasound scan surveillance in cirrhotic patients for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening. The aim of this study was to evaluate HCC surveillance and to provide the outcomes for the largest reported cirrhosis cohort in the United Kingdom.

We retrospectively reviewed all cirrhotic patients during the 6 months before April 1, 2014 at 3 teaching hospitals within the Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust. All patients with cirrhosis eligible for HCC screening in the cohort were reviewed for evidence of screening and were characterized as either "routine" or "overdue." Reasons for failure to meet guidelines were identified in overdue patients. Univariate analyses were conducted to determine clinical and sociodemographic predictors of surveillance with a view to performing multivariate analysis.

Of the 898 patients eligible for inclusion, 65% patients had HCC surveillance performed in the past 6 months. During the observation period, 61 (6.8%) cases of HCC were detected. Thirty-eight were picked up on surveillance, 9 incidentally and in 14 cases it could not be determined from the notes. Within this cohort HCCs diagnosed on surveillance did not demonstrate significantly superior outcomes compared with those picked up incidentally.

Surveillance of patients with cirrhosis within this cohort is suboptimal. Although disappointing at a local level, this is likely to be reflective of practice elsewhere.