1
|
Dickson-Swift V, Adams J, Spelten E, Blackberry I, Wilson C, Yuen E. Breast cancer screening motivation and behaviours of women aged over 75 years. Psychooncology 2024; 33:e6268. [PMID: 38110243 DOI: 10.1002/pon.6268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2023] [Revised: 11/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In Australia, breast screening is offered free every two years to women aged 50-74 years. Women aged ≥75 are eligible to receive a free mammogram but do not receive an invitation. This study aimed to explore the motivations and behaviours of women living in Australia aged ≥75 years regarding ongoing breast cancer screening given the public health guidance. METHODS Sixty women aged ≥75 were recruited from metropolitan, regional, and rural areas across Australia to participate in a descriptive qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were used to seek reflection on women's experience of screening, any advice they had received about screening beyond 75, their understanding of the value of screening and their intention to participate in the future. Thematic analysis of transcripts led to the development of themes. RESULTS Themes resulting from the study included: reasons to continue and discontinue screening, importance of inclusivity in the health system and availability of information. Regular screeners overwhelmingly wished to continue screening and had strong beliefs in the benefits of screening. Women received limited information about the benefits or harms of screening beyond age 75 and very few had discussed screening with their Primary Healthcare Provider. No longer receiving an invitation to attend screening impacted many women's decision-making. CONCLUSION More information via structured discussion with health professionals is required to inform women about the risks and benefits of ongoing screening. No longer being invited to attend screening left many women feeling confused and for some this led to feelings of discrimination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia Dickson-Swift
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joanne Adams
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Evelien Spelten
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Irene Blackberry
- John Richards Centre for Rural Ageing Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Wodonga, Victoria, Australia
| | - Carlene Wilson
- Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
| | - Eva Yuen
- Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
- Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
- Centre for Quality and Patient Safety - Monash Health Partnership, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Holt HK, Flores R, James JE, Waters C, Kaplan CP, Peterson CE, Sawaya GF. A qualitative study of primary care clinician's approach to ending cervical cancer screening in older women in the United States. Prev Med Rep 2023; 36:102500. [PMID: 38116273 PMCID: PMC10728461 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Revised: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 11/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023] Open
Abstract
The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends that cervical cancer screening end in average-risk patients with a cervix at 65 years of age if adequate screening measures have been met, defined as having 1) at least three normal consecutive cytology (Pap) tests, or 2) two normal cytology tests and/or two negative high-risk human papillomavirus tests between ages 55-65; the last test should be performed within the prior 5 years. Up to 60 % of all women aged 65 years and older who are ending screening do not meet the criteria for adequate screening. The objective of this study was to understand the process and approach that healthcare clinicians use to determine eligibility to end cervical cancer screening. In 2021 we conducted semi-structured interviews in San Francisco, CA with twelve healthcare clinicians: two family medicine physicians, three general internal medicine physicians, two obstetrician/gynecologists and five nurse practitioners. Thematic analysis, using inductive and deductive coding, was utilized. Three major themes emerged: following guidelines, relying on self-reported data regarding prior screening, and considering sexual activity as a factor in the decision to end screening. All interviewees endorsed following the USPSTF guidelines and they utilized self-report to determine eligibility to end screening. Clinicians' approach was dependent in part on their judgement about the reliability of the patient to convey their screening history. Sexual activity of the patient was considered when making clinical recommendations. Shared decision-making was often utilized. Clinicians voiced a strong reliance on self-reported screening history to end cervical cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hunter K. Holt
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
| | - Rey Flores
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
| | - Jennifer E. James
- Department of Social & Behavioral Sciences, and UCSF Bioethics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Catherine Waters
- Department of Community Health Systems, School of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Celia P. Kaplan
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Caryn E. Peterson
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - George F. Sawaya
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mukherjee S, Dong W, Schiltz NK, Stange KC, Cullen J, Gerds AT, Carraway HE, Singh A, Advani AS, Sekeres MA, Koroukian SM. Patterns of Diagnostic Evaluation and Determinants of Treatment in Older Patients With Non-transfusion Dependent Myelodysplastic Syndromes. Oncologist 2023; 28:901-910. [PMID: 37120291 PMCID: PMC10546824 DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyad114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2022] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 05/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Older patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), particularly those with no or one cytopenia and no transfusion dependence, typically have an indolent course. Approximately, half of these receive the recommended diagnostic evaluation (DE) for MDS. We explored factors determining DE in these patients and its impact on subsequent treatment and outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS We used 2011-2014 Medicare data to identify patients ≥66 years of age diagnosed with MDS. We used Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis to identify combinations of factors associated with DE and its impact on subsequent treatment. Variables examined included demographics, comorbidities, nursing home status, and investigative procedures performed. We conducted a logistic regression analysis to identify correlates associated with receipt of DE and treatment. RESULTS Of 16 851 patients with MDS, 51% underwent DE. patients with MDS with no cytopenia (n = 3908) had the lowest uptake of DE (34.7%). Compared to patients with no cytopenia, those with any cytopenia had nearly 3 times higher odds of receiving DE [adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 2.81: 95% CI, 2.60-3.04] and the odds were higher for men than for women [AOR, 1.39: 95%CI, 1.30-1.48] and for Non-Hispanic Whites [vs. everyone else (AOR, 1.17: 95% CI, 1.06-1.29)]. The CART showed DE as the principal discriminating node, followed by the presence of any cytopenia for receiving MDS treatment. The lowest percentage of treatment was observed in patients without DE, at 14.6%. CONCLUSION In this select older patients with MDS, we identified disparities in accurate diagnosis by demographic and clinical factors. Receipt of DE influenced subsequent treatment but not survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sudipto Mukherjee
- Leukemia Program, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Weichuan Dong
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Population Cancer Analytics Shared Resource, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Nicholas K Schiltz
- Frances P. Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Kurt C Stange
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Jennifer Cullen
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Aaron T Gerds
- Leukemia Program, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Hetty E Carraway
- Leukemia Program, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Abhay Singh
- Leukemia Program, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Anjali S Advani
- Leukemia Program, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Mikkael A Sekeres
- Division of Hematology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Siran M Koroukian
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Population Cancer Analytics Shared Resource, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang T, Dossett LA. Incorporating Value-Based Decisions in Breast Cancer Treatment Algorithms. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:777-797. [PMID: 37714643 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
Given the excellent prognosis and availability of evidence-based treatment, patients with early-stage breast cancer are at risk of overtreatment. In this review, we summarize key opportunities to incorporate value-based decisions to optimize the delivery of high-value treatment across the breast cancer care continuum.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ton Wang
- Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lesly A Dossett
- Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Brotzman LE, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Perceived Barriers Among Clinicians and Older Adults Aged 65 and Older Regarding Use of Life Expectancy to Inform Cancer Screening: A Narrative Review and Comparison. Med Care Res Rev 2023; 80:372-385. [PMID: 36800914 DOI: 10.1177/10775587231153269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/20/2023]
Abstract
While cancer screening guidelines increasingly recommend incorporating life expectancy estimates to inform screening decisions for older adults, little is known about how this happens in practice. This review summarizes current knowledge about primary care clinician and older adult (65+) perspectives about use of life expectancy to guide cancer screening decisions. Clinicians report operational barriers, uncertainty, and hesitation around use of life expectancy in screening decisions. They recognize it may help them more accurately weigh benefits and harms but are unsure how to estimate life expectancy for individual patients. Older adults face conceptual barriers and are generally unconvinced of the benefits of considering their life expectancy when making screening decisions. Life expectancy will always be a difficult topic for clinicians and patients, but there are advantages to incorporating it in cancer screening decisions. We highlight key takeaways from both clinician and older adult perspectives to guide future research.
Collapse
|
6
|
Schoenborn NL, Nagler RH, Schonberg MA, Pollack CE, Boyd CM, Xue QL, Gollust SE. Willingness to Stop Screening Mammograms Among Older Women in the United States: Results From a National Survey. J Gen Intern Med 2023; 38:1091-1093. [PMID: 36175762 PMCID: PMC10039136 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-022-07819-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2022] [Accepted: 09/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy L Schoenborn
- Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Rebekah H Nagler
- University of Minnesota Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Minneapolis, USA
| | - Mara A Schonberg
- Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Craig E Pollack
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA
| | - Cynthia M Boyd
- Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA
- Johns Hopkins Center on Aging and Health, Baltimore, USA
| | - Qian-Li Xue
- Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins Center on Aging and Health, Baltimore, USA
| | - Sarah E Gollust
- Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Quintal C, Antunes M. Mirror, mirror on the wall, when are inequalities higher, after all? Analysis of breast and cervical cancer screening in 30 European countries. Soc Sci Med 2022; 312:115371. [PMID: 36137367 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2020] [Revised: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/11/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
Screening for breast and cervical cancer is strongly related with a reduction in cancer mortality but previous evidence has found socioeconomic inequalities in screening. Using up-to-date data from the second wave of the European Health Interview Survey (2013-2015), this study aims to analyse income-related inequalities in mammography screening and Pap smear test in 30 European countries. We propose a framework that combines age group and screening interval, identifying situations of due-, under-, and over-screening. Coverage rates, standard and generalised concentration indices are calculated. Overall, pro-rich inequalities in screening persist though there are varied combinations of prevalence of screening attendance and relative inequality across countries. Bulgaria and particularly Romania stand out with low coverage and high inequality. Some Baltic and Mediterranean countries also present less favourable figures on both accounts. In general, there are not marked differences between mammography and Pap smear test, for the recommended situation ('Due-screening'). 'Extreme under-screening' is concentrated among lower income quintiles in basically all countries analysed, for both screenings. These women, who never screened, are at risk of entering the group of 'Lost opportunity', once they reach the upper-limit age of the target group. At the same time, there are signals of 'Over-screening', within target group, due to screening more frequently than recommended. In several countries, 'Over-screening' seems to be concentrated among richer women. This is not only a waste of resources, but it can also cause harms. The inequalities found in 'Extreme under-screening' and 'Over-screening' raise concerns on whether women are making informed choices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlota Quintal
- University of Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Portugal; CEISUC, Portugal.
| | - Micaela Antunes
- University of Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Portugal.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hoare S, Powell A, Modi RN, Armstrong N, Griffin SJ, Mant J, Burt J. Why do people take part in atrial fibrillation screening? Qualitative interview study in English primary care. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e051703. [PMID: 35296474 PMCID: PMC8928318 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES There is insufficient evidence to support national screening programmes for atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, some practitioners, policy-makers and special interest groups have encouraged introduction of opportunistic screening in primary care in order to reduce the incidence of stroke through earlier detection and treatment of AF. The attitudes of the public towards AF screening are unknown. We aimed to explore why AF screening participants took part in the screening. DESIGN Semistructured longitudinal interview study of participant engagement in the SAFER study (Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke). We undertook initial interviews face to face, with up to two follow-up telephone interviews during the screening process. We thematically analysed and synthesised these data to understand shared views of screening participation. SETTING 5 primary care practices in the East of England, UK. PARTICIPANTS 23 people taking part in the SAFER study first feasibility phase. RESULTS Participants were supportive of screening for AF, explaining their participation in screening as a 'good thing to do'. Participants suggested screening could facilitate earlier diagnosis, more effective treatment, and a better future outcome, despite most being unfamiliar with AF. Participating in AF screening helped attenuate participants' concerns about stroke and demonstrated their commitment to self-care and being a 'good patient'. Participants felt that the screening test was non-invasive, and they were unlikely to have AF; they therefore considered engaging in AF screening was low risk, with few perceived harms. CONCLUSIONS Participants assessed the SAFER AF screening programme to be a legitimate, relevant and safe screening opportunity, and complied obediently with what they perceived to be a recommendation to take part. Their unreserved acceptance of screening benefit and lack of awareness of potential harms suggests that uptake would be high but reinforces the importance of ensuring participants receive balanced information about AF screening initiatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN16939438; Pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Hoare
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alison Powell
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rakesh Narendra Modi
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Natalie Armstrong
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Simon J Griffin
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jonathan Mant
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jenni Burt
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Smith J, Dodd RH, Gainey KM, Naganathan V, Cvejic E, Jansen J, McCaffery KJ. Patient-Reported Factors Associated With Older Adults' Cancer Screening Decision-making: A Systematic Review. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2133406. [PMID: 34748004 PMCID: PMC8576581 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.33406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Decisions for older adults (aged ≥65 years) and their clinicians about whether to continue to screen for cancer are not easy. Many older adults who are frail or have limited life expectancy or comorbidities continue to be screened for cancer despite guidelines suggesting they should not; furthermore, many older adults have limited knowledge of the potential harms of continuing to be screened. OBJECTIVE To summarize the patient-reported factors associated with older adults' decisions regarding screening for breast, prostate, colorectal, and cervical cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW Studies were identified by searching databases from January 2000 to June 2020 and were independently assessed for inclusion by 2 authors. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently conducted by 2 authors, and then all decisions were cross-checked and discussed where necessary. Data analysis was performed from September to December 2020. FINDINGS The search yielded 2475 records, of which 21 unique studies were included. Nine studies were quantitative, 8 were qualitative, and 4 used mixed method designs. Of the 21 studies, 17 were conducted in the US, and 10 of 21 assessed breast cancer screening decisions only. Factors associated with decision-making were synthesized into 5 categories: demographic, health and clinical, psychological, physician, and social and system. Commonly identified factors associated with the decision to undergo screening included personal or family history of cancer, positive screening attitudes, routine or habit, to gain knowledge, friends, and a physician's recommendation. Factors associated with the decision to forgo screening included being older, negative screening attitudes, and desire not to know about cancer. Some factors had varying associations, including insurance coverage, living in a nursing home, prior screening experience, health problems, limited life expectancy, perceived cancer risk, risks of screening, family, and a physician's recommendation to stop. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although guidelines suggest incorporating life expectancy and health status to inform older adults' cancer screening decisions, older adults' ingrained beliefs about screening may run counter to these concepts. Communication strategies are needed that support older adults to make informed cancer screening decisions by addressing underlying screening beliefs in context with their perceived and actual risk of developing cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna Smith
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rachael H. Dodd
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Karen M. Gainey
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Vasi Naganathan
- Centre for Education and Research on Ageing, Concord Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Erin Cvejic
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jesse Jansen
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- School for Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Kirsten J. McCaffery
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Skolarus TA, Forman J, Sparks JB, Metreger T, Hawley ST, Caram MV, Dossett L, Paniagua-Cruz A, Makarov DV, Leppert JT, Shelton JB, Stensland KD, Hollenbeck BK, Shahinian V, Sales AE, Wittmann DA. Learning from the "tail end" of de-implementation: the case of chemical castration for localized prostate cancer. Implement Sci Commun 2021; 2:124. [PMID: 34711274 PMCID: PMC8555144 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-021-00224-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 09/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Men with prostate cancer are often treated with the suppression of testosterone through long-acting injectable drugs termed chemical castration or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In most cases, ADT is not an appropriate treatment for localized prostate cancer, indicating low-value care. Guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Behavior Change Wheel's Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Model (COM-B), we conducted a qualitative study to identify behavioral determinants of low-value ADT use to manage localized prostate cancer, and theory-based opportunities for de-implementation strategy development. METHODS We used national cancer registry and administrative data from 2016 to 2017 to examine the variation in low-value ADT use across Veterans Health Administration facilities. Using purposive sampling, we selected high- and low-performing sites to conduct 20 urology provider interviews regarding low-value ADT. We coded transcripts into TDF domains and mapped content to the COM-B model to generate a conceptual framework for addressing low-value ADT practices. RESULTS Our interview findings reflected provider perspectives on prescribing ADT as low-value localized prostate cancer treatment, including barriers and facilitators to de-implementing low-value ADT. We characterized providers as belonging in 1 of 3 categories with respect to low-value ADT use: 1) never prescribe 2); willing, under some circumstances, to prescribe: and 3) prescribe as an acceptable treatment option. Provider capability to prescribe low-value ADT depended on their knowledge of localized prostate cancer treatment options (knowledge) coupled with interpersonal skills to engage patients in educational discussion (skills). Provider opportunity to prescribe low-value ADT centered on the environmental resources to inform ADT decisions (e.g., multi-disciplinary review), perceived guideline availability, and social roles and influences regarding ADT practices, such as prior training. Provider motivation involved goals of ADT use, including patient preferences, beliefs in capabilities/professional confidence, and beliefs about the consequences of prescribing or not prescribing ADT. CONCLUSIONS Use of the TDF domains and the COM-B model enabled us to conceptualize provider behavior with respect to low-value ADT use and clarify possible areas for intervention to effect de-implementation of low-value ADT prescribing in localized prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03579680.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ted A Skolarus
- VA HSR&D Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Jane Forman
- VA HSR&D Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Jordan B Sparks
- VA HSR&D Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Tabitha Metreger
- VA HSR&D Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Sarah T Hawley
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Megan V Caram
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Lesly Dossett
- Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Alan Paniagua-Cruz
- VA HSR&D Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Danil V Makarov
- VA New York Harbor Healthcare System and NYU School of Medicine Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - John T Leppert
- Surgical Service, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | | | - Kristian D Stensland
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Brent K Hollenbeck
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Vahakn Shahinian
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Anne E Sales
- Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Daniela A Wittmann
- Department of Urology, Dow Division of Health Services Research, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Schuttner L, Haraldsson B, Maynard C, Helfrich CD, Reddy A, Parikh T, Nelson KM, Wong E. Factors Associated With Low-Value Cancer Screenings in the Veterans Health Administration. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2130581. [PMID: 34677595 PMCID: PMC8536952 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.30581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Most clinical practice guidelines recommend stopping cancer screenings when risks exceed benefits, yet low-value screenings persist. The Veterans Health Administration focuses on improving the value and quality of care, using a patient-centered medical home model that may affect cancer screening behavior. OBJECTIVE To understand rates and factors associated with outpatient low-value cancer screenings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study assessed the receipt of low-value cancer screening and associated factors among 5 993 010 veterans. Four measures of low-value cancer screening defined by validated recommendations of practices to avoid were constructed using administrative data. Patients with cancer screenings in 2017 at Veterans Health Administration primary care clinics were included. Excluded patients had recent symptoms or historic high-risk diagnoses that may affect test appropriateness (eg, melena preceding colonoscopy). Data were analyzed from December 23, 2019, to June 21, 2021. EXPOSURES Receipt of cancer screening test. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Low-value screenings were defined as occurring for average-risk patients outside of guideline-recommended ages or if the 1-year mortality risk estimated using a previously validated score was at least 50%. Factors evaluated in multivariable regression models included patient, clinician, and clinic characteristics and patient-centered medical home domain performance for team-based care, access, and continuity previously developed from administrative and survey data. RESULTS Of 5 993 010 veterans (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [16.8] years; 5 496 976 men [91.7%]; 1 027 836 non-Hispanic Black [17.2%] and 4 539 341 non-Hispanic White [75.7%] race and ethnicity) enrolled in primary care, 903 612 of 4 647 479 men of average risk (19.4%) underwent prostate cancer screening; 299 765 of 5 770 622 patients of average risk (5.2%) underwent colorectal cancer screening; 21 930 of 469 045 women of average risk (4.7%) underwent breast cancer screening; and 65 511 of 458 086 women of average risk (14.3%) underwent cervical cancer screening. Of patients screened, low-value testing was rare for 3 cancers, with receipt of a low-value test in 633 of 21 930 of women screened for breast cancer (2.9%), 630 of 65 511 of women screened for cervical cancer (1.0%), and 6790 of 299 765 of patients screened for colorectal cancer (2.3%). However, 350 705 of 4 647 479 of screened men (7.5%) received a low-value prostate cancer test. Patient race and ethnicity, sociodemographic factors, and illness burden were significantly associated with likelihood of receipt of low-value tests among screened patients. No single patient-, clinician-, or clinic-level factor explained the receipt of a low-value test across cancer screening cohorts. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This large cohort study found that low-value breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings were rare in the Veterans Health Administration, but more than one-third of patients screened for prostate cancer were tested outside of clinical practice guidelines. Guideline-discordant care has quality implications and is not consistently explained by associated multilevel factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linnaea Schuttner
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
| | | | - Charles Maynard
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Christian D. Helfrich
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Ashok Reddy
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Toral Parikh
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
- Geriatrics and Extended Care, VA Puget Sound Healthcare System
| | - Karin M. Nelson
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Edwin Wong
- Health Services Research and Development, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Yang EZ, Kotwal AA, Lisha NE, Wong JS, Huang AJ. Formal and informal social participation and elder mistreatment in a national sample of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2021; 69:2579-2590. [PMID: 34105769 DOI: 10.1111/jgs.17282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2021] [Revised: 05/05/2021] [Accepted: 05/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Older adults' susceptibility to mistreatment may be affected by their participation in social activities, but little is known about relationships between social participation and elder mistreatment. DESIGN Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS National probability sample of older community-dwelling U.S. adults interviewed in 2015-2016, including 1268 women and 973 men (mean age 75 years and 76 years, respectively; 82% non-Hispanic white). MEASUREMENTS Frequency of participation in formal activities (organized meetings, religious services, and volunteering) and informal social activities (visiting friends and family) was assessed by questionnaire. Elder mistreatment included emotional (four items), physical (two items), and financial mistreatment (two items) since age 60. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between each type of social participation and elder mistreatment among men and women, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, education, and comorbidity. RESULTS Forty percent of women and 22% of men reported at least one form of mistreatment (emotional, physical, or financial). Women reporting at least monthly engagement in formal social activities were more likely to report emotional mistreatment (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-2.33). Among men, monthly organized meeting attendance was associated with increased odds of emotional mistreatment (AOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01-1.93). Weekly informal socializing was inversely associated with emotional mistreatment (AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.78) and financial mistreatment (AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.85) among women. CONCLUSION In this national cohort, older adults who were frequently engaged in formal social activities reported similar or higher levels of mistreatment than those with less frequent organized social participation. Older women with regular informal contact with family or friends were less likely to report some kinds of mistreatment. Strategies for detecting and mitigating elder mistreatment should consider differences in patterns of formal and informal social participation and their potential contribution to mistreatment risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emmy Z Yang
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ashwin A Kotwal
- Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Nadra E Lisha
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Jaclyn S Wong
- Department of Sociology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA
| | - Alison J Huang
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ten Haaf K, van der Aalst CM, de Koning HJ, Kaaks R, Tammemägi MC. Personalising lung cancer screening: An overview of risk-stratification opportunities and challenges. Int J Cancer 2021; 149:250-263. [PMID: 33783822 PMCID: PMC8251929 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2020] [Revised: 03/04/2021] [Accepted: 03/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Randomised clinical trials have shown the efficacy of computed tomography lung cancer screening, initiating discussions on whether and how to implement population‐based screening programs. Due to smoking behaviour being the primary risk‐factor for lung cancer and part of the criteria for determining screening eligibility, lung cancer screening is inherently risk‐based. In fact, the selection of high‐risk individuals has been shown to be essential in implementing lung cancer screening in a cost‐effective manner. Furthermore, studies have shown that further risk‐stratification may improve screening efficiency, allow personalisation of the screening interval and reduce health disparities. However, implementing risk‐based lung cancer screening programs also requires overcoming a number of challenges. There are indications that risk‐based approaches can negatively influence the trade‐off between individual benefits and harms if not applied thoughtfully. Large‐scale implementation of targeted, risk‐based screening programs has been limited thus far. Consequently, questions remain on how to efficiently identify and invite high‐risk individuals from the general population. Finally, while risk‐based approaches may increase screening program efficiency, efficiency should be balanced with the overall impact of the screening program. In this review, we will address the opportunities and challenges in applying risk‐stratification in different aspects of lung cancer screening programs, as well as the balance between screening program efficiency and impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Ten Haaf
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC-University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carlijn M van der Aalst
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC-University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Harry J de Koning
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC-University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rudolf Kaaks
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Martin C Tammemägi
- Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Oshima SM, Tait SD, Fish L, Greenup RA, Grimm LJ. Primary care provider perspectives on screening mammography in older women: A qualitative study. Prev Med Rep 2021; 22:101380. [PMID: 33996393 PMCID: PMC8093928 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101380] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2020] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 04/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Guidelines informing screening mammography for older women are lacking. This study sought to characterize PCP perspectives on screening mammography for patients aged 75 and older. Methods This was an exploratory, qualitative study based on semi-structured, one-on-one interviews with PCPs from six clinics affiliated with a tertiary medical center. Two independent coders analyzed interview transcripts and identified themes, subthemes, and representative quotes using inductive analysis methodology. Results Ten providers completed interviews. The majority (90%) of providers reported insufficient evidence to suggest a best practice for screening in this population. Providers relied on shared decision-making with patients, a process facilitated by strong provider-patient relationships. Providers took into consideration factors such as functional status, personal risk of breast cancer, and patient preference. Time constraints disincentivized providers to engage in discussions. Conclusions PCPs make decisions about screening mammography for older patients on an individualized basis, taking into account patient overall health status and desire for aggressive intervention. They often rely on shared decision-making given unclear clinical guidelines. Practice implications These findings suggest that fostering strong provider-patient relationships, addressing patient knowledge gaps, and compensating providers for time spent on counseling may facilitate cost-efficient and patient-centered utilization of screening mammography.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sarah D Tait
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
| | - Laura Fish
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
| | - Rachel A Greenup
- Department of Surgery, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
| | - Lars J Grimm
- Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Kotwal AA, Walter LC. Cancer Screening in Older Adults: Individualized Decision-Making and Communication Strategies. Med Clin North Am 2020; 104:989-1006. [PMID: 33099456 PMCID: PMC7594102 DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2020.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Cancer screening decisions in older adults can be complex due to the unclear cancer-specific mortality benefits of screening and several known harms including false positives, overdiagnosis, and procedural complications from downstream diagnostic interventions. In this review, we provide a framework for individualized cancer screening decisions among older adults, involving accounting for overall health and life expectancy, individual values, and the risks and benefits of specific cancer screening tests. We then discuss strategies for effective communication of recommendations during clinical visits that are considered more effective, easy to understand, and acceptable by older adults and clinicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashwin A Kotwal
- Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Geriatrics, Palliative, and Extended Care Service Line, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| | - Louise C Walter
- Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Geriatrics, Palliative, and Extended Care Service Line, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Roy S, Moss JL, Rodriguez-Colon SM, Shen C, Cooper JD, Lennon RP, Lengerich EJ, Adelman A, Curry W, Ruffin MT. Examining Older Adults' Attitudes and Perceptions of Cancer Screening and Overscreening: A Qualitative Study. J Prim Care Community Health 2020; 11:2150132720959234. [PMID: 33054558 PMCID: PMC7576932 DOI: 10.1177/2150132720959234] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction/Objectives: Screening guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) are less clear for older adults due to the potential harms that may result from screening. Understanding older adults’ attitudes and perceptions, especially racial/ethnic minority and underserved adults, of cancer screening can help health care providers determine how best to communicate with older adults about cancer screening and screening cessation. The objective of this study was to determine how older adults primarily from minority/underserved backgrounds perceive cancer screening and overscreening. Methods: Four focus groups (n = 39) were conducted with adults (>=65 years of age) in 3 community settings in south-central Pennsylvania. Two focus groups were conducted in Spanish and translated to English upon transcription. Focus group data was managed and analyzed using QSR NVivo 12. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the data where themes emerged following the coding process. Results: The focus group participants had an average age of 74 years and were primarily female (74%) and Hispanic (69%), with 69% reporting having less than a high school degree. Four key themes were identified from the focus groups: (1) importance of tailored and targeted education/information; (2) impact of physician/patient communication; (3) impact of barriers and facilitators to screening on cancer screening cessation; and (4) awareness of importance of screening. Participants were more likely to be agreeable to screening cessation if they received specific information regarding their health status and previous medical history from their physician as to why screening should be stopped and told by their physician that the screening decision is up to them. Conclusions: Older adults prefer individualized information from their physician in order to justify screening cessation but are against incorporating life expectancy into the discussion. Future research should focus on developing interventions to test the effectiveness of culturally tailored screening cessation messages for older adults.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Chan Shen
- Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Alan Adelman
- Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Cancer Screening Among Older Adults: a Geriatrician's Perspective on Breast, Cervical, Colon, Prostate, and Lung Cancer Screening. Curr Oncol Rep 2020; 22:108. [PMID: 32803486 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-020-00968-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW We summarize the evidence of benefits, harms, and tools to assist in individualized decisions among older adults in screening for breast, prostate, colon, lung, and cervical cancer. RECENT FINDINGS The benefits of cancer screening in older adults remain unclear due to minimal inclusion of adults > 75 years old in most randomized controlled trials. Indirect evidence suggests that the benefits of screening seen in younger adults (< 70 years old) can be extrapolated to older adults when they have an estimated life expectancy of at least 10 years. However, older adults, especially those with limited life expectancy, may be at increased risk for experiencing harms of screening, including overdiagnosis of clinically unimportant diseases, complications from diagnostic procedures, and distress after false positive test results. We provide a framework to integrate key factors such as health status, risks and benefits of specific tests, and patient preferences to guide clinicians in cancer screening decisions in older adults.
Collapse
|
18
|
Smith J, Dodd RH, Hersch J, Cvejic E, McCaffery K, Jansen J. Effect of different communication strategies about stopping cancer screening on screening intention and cancer anxiety: a randomised online trial of older adults in Australia. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e034061. [PMID: 32532766 PMCID: PMC7295415 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess different strategies for communicating to older adults about stopping cancer screening. DESIGN 4 (recommendation statement about stopping screening)×(2; time) online survey-based randomised controlled trial. SETTING Australia. PARTICIPANTS 271 English-speaking participants, aged 65-90, screened for breast/prostate cancer at least once in past decade. INTERVENTIONS Time 1: participants read a scenario in which their general practitioner (GP) informed them about the potential benefits and harms of cancer screening, followed by double-blinded randomisation to one of four recommendation statements to stop screening: control ('this screening test would harm you more than benefit you'), health status ('your other health issues should take priority'), life expectancy framed positively ('this test would not help you live longer') and negatively ('you may not live long enough to benefit'). Time 2: in a follow-up scenario, the GP explained why guidelines changed over time (anchoring bias intervention). MEASURES Primary outcomes: screening intention and cancer anxiety (10-point scale, higher=greater intention/anxiety), measured at both time points. SECONDARY OUTCOMES trust (in their GP, the information provided, the Australian healthcare system), decisional conflict and knowledge of the information presented. RESULTS 271 participants' responses analysed. No main effects were found. However, screening intention was lower for the negatively framed life expectancy versus health status statement (6.0 vs 7.1, mean difference (MD)=1.1, p=0.049, 95% CI 0.0 to 2.2) in post hoc analyses. Cancer anxiety was lower for the negatively versus positively framed life expectancy statement (4.8 vs 5.8, MD=1.0, p=0.025, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.9). The anchoring bias intervention reduced screening intention (MD=0.8, p=0.044, 95% CI 0.6 to 1.0) and cancer anxiety (MD=0.3, p=0.002, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.4) across all conditions. CONCLUSION Older adults may reduce their screening intention without reporting increased cancer anxiety when clinicians use a more confronting strategy communicating they may not live long enough to benefit and add an explicit explanation why the recommendation has changed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618001306202; Results).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna Smith
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Rachael H Dodd
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jolyn Hersch
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Erin Cvejic
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kirsten McCaffery
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jesse Jansen
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|