1
|
Snavely AC, Foley K, Dharod A, Dignan M, Brower H, Wright E, Miller DP. Effectiveness and implementation of mPATH™-CRC: a mobile health system for colorectal cancer screening. Trials 2023; 24:274. [PMID: 37060023 PMCID: PMC10103028 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07273-5] [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: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 03/23/2023] [Indexed: 04/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely recommended but underused, even though CRC is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the USA. The mPATH™ program is an iPad-based application designed to identify patients due for CRC screening, educate them on the commonly used screening tests, and help them select their best option, with the goal of increasing CRC screening rates. METHODS The mPATH™ program consists of questions asked of all adult patients at check-in (mPATH™-CheckIn), as well as a module specific for patients due for CRC screening (mPATH™-CRC). In this study, the mPATH™ program is evaluated through a Type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness design. Specifically, the study consists of three parts: (1) a cluster-randomized controlled trial of primary care clinics comparing a "high touch" evidence-based implementation strategy with a "low touch" implementation strategy; (2) a nested pragmatic study evaluating the effectiveness of mPATH-CRC™ on completion of CRC screening; and (3) a mixed-methods study evaluating factors that facilitate or impede the maintenance of interventions like mPATH-CRC™. The primary objective is to compare the proportion of patients aged 50-74 who are eligible for CRC screening who complete mPATH™-CRC in the 6th month following implementation between the "high touch" and "low touch" implementation strategies. Effectiveness of mPATH™-CRC is evaluated by comparing the proportion who complete CRC screening within 16 weeks of their visit to the clinic between a pre-implementation cohort (8 months before implementation) and a post-implementation cohort (8 months after implementation). DISCUSSION This study will provide data on both the implementation of the mPATH™ program and its effectiveness in improving screening rates for CRC. In addition, this work has the potential to have an even broader impact by identifying strategies to support the sustained use of other similar technology-based primary care interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03843957. Registered on 18 February 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna C Snavely
- Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
| | - Kristie Foley
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Ajay Dharod
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Mark Dignan
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Holly Brower
- Wake Forest University School of Business, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Elena Wright
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - David P Miller
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gonzales R, Ratnapradipa K, De Alba A, Chen K, Smith L, Kim J, Wang H, Farazi PA. Awareness and knowledge of Colorectal Cancer Screening among Latinos in Omaha, Nebraska. J Immigr Minor Health 2023; 25:161-167. [PMID: 35357621 DOI: 10.1007/s10903-022-01358-0] [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: 09/02/2020] [Revised: 03/11/2022] [Accepted: 03/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain low in Latino communities. We sought to determine the screening awareness and attitudes in Omaha, Nebraska. METHODS We interviewed 150 Latinos at an urban Federally Qualified Health Center, June-October 2017. Chi-square or Fisher-exact tests and multiple logistic regression models were used for data analysis. RESULTS Participants reported low educational attainment, low income, and limited access to insurance or a primary provider. Less than one-third of participants aged 50 + had ever heard of FOBT (32.6%) or colonoscopy (30.4%). For individuals 50+, access to a primary care provider (p = .03) and knowing the screening initiation age (p = .03) were associated with ever having a colonoscopy. Higher knowledge score was a strong predictor of any CRC screening. DISCUSSION Knowledge predicted screening, suggesting interventions should aim to educate this population regarding CRC screening guidelines and options and work with stakeholders to make CRC screening more accessible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roger Gonzales
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 68198-4395, Omaha, NE, United States.,Department of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Kendra Ratnapradipa
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 68198-4395, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Armando De Alba
- Department of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Ken Chen
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 68198-4395, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Lynette Smith
- Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Jungyoon Kim
- Department of Health Services Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Hongmei Wang
- Department of Health Services Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States
| | - Paraskevi A Farazi
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 68198-4395, Omaha, NE, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shergill J, Makaroff KE, Lauzon M, Spiegel BM, Almario CV. Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) versus colonoscopy: Does knowing that a positive FIT requires a follow-up colonoscopy affect initial decision making in the US? Prev Med Rep 2022; 27:101825. [PMID: 35656227 PMCID: PMC9152796 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.101825] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Revised: 05/04/2022] [Accepted: 05/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Although many people prefer fecal immunochemical test (FIT) over colonoscopy due to its noninvasive nature, it is unclear whether FIT would still be preferred for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening if they were explicitly informed that + FIT requires follow-up colonoscopy. To address this gap, we administered two conjoint analysis surveys-one that explained the need for a follow-up colonoscopy after + FIT while the other did not-to a US nationwide sample of Americans and then assessed whether there were differences in colonoscopy/FIT preferences between cohorts. We recruited adults ≥ 40yo who had not undergone CRC screening via an online survey research firm. We deployed two surveys that used conjoint analysis to assess decision making surrounding CRC screening tests: Survey 1 (4/2-4/15/2021)-did not inform participants that they need a colonoscopy following a + FIT; Survey 2 (4/29-6/2/2021)-informed respondents of the potential need. Using the conjoint analysis data, we determined the proportion of those who preferred FIT or colonoscopy and then used logistic regression to assess for differences in colonoscopy/FIT preferences between the cohorts. Overall, 501 and 1,000 individuals completed Survey 1 (without description of need for colonoscopy after + FIT) and Survey 2 (with description), respectively. There was no difference in test preference between cohorts after adjusting for covariates in the logistic regression (adjusted p = 0.09): Survey 1 (without description)-colonoscopy 28.5%, FIT 71.5%; Survey 2 (with description)-colonoscopy 26.7%, FIT 73.3%. Thus, knowledge that a + FIT requires a follow-up colonoscopy does not alter people's strong preference for non-invasive stool testing with FIT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaspreet Shergill
- Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Katherine E. Makaroff
- Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CS-CORE), Los Angeles, CA, USA
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Marie Lauzon
- Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Research Center, Cedars-Sinai Cancer, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Brennan M.R. Spiegel
- Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Karsh Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Cancer Prevention & Control Program, Cedars-Sinai Cancer, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Christopher V. Almario
- Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CS-CORE), Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Karsh Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Division of Health Services Research, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Division of Informatics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Cancer Prevention & Control Program, Cedars-Sinai Cancer, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System. Dig Dis Sci 2021; 66:2585-2594. [PMID: 32816217 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-020-06545-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2020] [Accepted: 08/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
AIMS Although colorectal cancer screening (CRC) using stool-based test is well-studied, evidence on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) patterns in a safety-net healthcare system utilizing opportunistic screening is limited. We studied the FIT completion rates and adenoma detection rate (ADR) of positive FIT-colonoscopy (FIT-C) in an urban safety-net system. METHODS We performed a retrospective cross-sectional chart review on individuals ≥ 50 years who underwent CRC screening using FIT or screening colonoscopy, 09/01/2017-08/30/2018. Demographic differences in FIT completion were studied; ADR of FIT-C was compared to that of screening colonoscopy. RESULTS Among 13,427 individuals with FIT ordered, 7248 (54%) completed the stool test and 230 (48%) followed up a positive FIT with colonoscopy. Increasing age (OR 1.01, CI 1.01-1.02), non-Hispanic Blacks (OR 0.87, CI 0.80-0.95, p = 0.002), current smokers (OR 0.84, CI 0.77-0.92, p < 0.0001), those with Medicaid (OR 0.86, CI 0.77-0.96, p = 0.006), commercial insurance (OR 0.85, CI 0.78-0.94, p = 0.002), CCI score ≥ 3 (OR 0.82, CI 0.74-0.91, p < 0.0001), orders by family medicine providers (OR 0.87, CI 0.81-0.94, p < 0.0001) were associated with lower completion of stool test. Individuals from low median household income cities had lower follow-up of positive FIT, OR 0.43, CI 0.21-0.86, p = 0.017. ADR of FIT-C was higher than that of screening colonoscopy. CONCLUSION Adherence to CRC screening is low in safety-net systems employing opportunistic screening. Understanding demographic differences may allow providers to formulate targeted strategies in high-risk vulnerable groups.
Collapse
|
5
|
Blackman EL, Ragin C, Jones RM. Colorectal Cancer Screening Prevalence and Adherence for the Cancer Prevention Project of Philadelphia (CAP3) Participants Who Self-Identify as Black. Front Oncol 2021; 11:690718. [PMID: 34395256 PMCID: PMC8363251 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.690718] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2021] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths among Black men and women. While colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) reduces mortality, research assessing within race CRCS differences is lacking. This study assessed CRCS prevalence and adherence to national screening recommendations and the association of region of birth with CRCS adherence, within a diverse Black population. METHODS Data from age-eligible adults, 50-75 years, (N = 357) participating in an ongoing, cross-sectional study, was used to measure CRCS prevalence and adherence and region of birth (e.g., Caribbean-, African-, US-born). Prevalence and adherence were based on contemporaneous US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Descriptive statistics were calculated and adjusted prevalence and adherence proportions were calculated by region of birth. Adjusted logistic regression models were performed to assess the association between region of birth and overall CRCS and modality-specific adherence. RESULTS Respondents were 69.5% female, 43.3% married/living with partner, and 38.4% had <$25,000 annual income. Overall, 78.2% reported past CRCS; however, stool test had the lowest prevalence overall (34.6%). Caribbean (95.0%) and African immigrants (90.2%) had higher prevalence of overall CRCS compared to US-born Blacks (59.2%) (p-value <0.001). African immigrants were five times more likely to be adherent to overall CRCS compared to US-born Blacks (OR = 5.25, 95% CI 1.34-20.6). Immigrants had higher odds of being adherent to colonoscopy (Caribbean OR = 6.84, 95% CI 1.49-31.5; African OR = 7.14, 95% CI 1.27-40.3) compared to US-born Blacks. CONCLUSIONS While Caribbean and African immigrants have higher prevalence and adherence of CRCS when compared US-born Blacks, CRCS is still sub-optimal in the Black population. Efforts to increase CRCS, specifically stool testing, within the Black population are warranted, with targeted interventions geared towards US-born Blacks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth L. Blackman
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center- Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- African Caribbean Cancer Consortium, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Camille Ragin
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center- Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- African Caribbean Cancer Consortium, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Resa M. Jones
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center- Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol. Implement Sci 2020; 15:96. [PMID: 33121536 PMCID: PMC7599111 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01045-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2020] [Accepted: 09/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation. Methods This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase. Discussion There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study. Trial registration This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04514341) on 14 August 2020.
Collapse
|
7
|
Blaes A, Vogel RI, Nagler RH, Allen A, Mason S, Teoh D, Talley K, Raymond NC, Wyman JF. Breast Cancer Screening Practices for High-Risk Women: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Primary Care Providers. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2020; 29:686-692. [PMID: 31433260 PMCID: PMC7247038 DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Little literature exists on primary care providers' knowledge and preferences toward breast cancer screening for high-risk women. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey of primary care providers in Minnesota was conducted in 2016. The primary aim was to determine the breast cancer screening practices of primary care providers for women at high risk for breast cancer. A multipart questionnaire focused on breast cancer screening practices for high-risk women and perceived risks/benefits of breast cancer screening was administered. Statistical analyses, included descriptive statistics and tests of differences in screening practices and knowledge across key professional characteristics, were conducted. Results: Eight hundred five primary care providers completed the survey (7.7% response). Participants were predominantly female (72.2%); 43.9% were physicians, 11.4% physician assistants, and 44.8% advanced practice registered nurses. One-quarter of providers recommended mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for high-risk women ages 40-49 years. There were no differences in breast MRI recommendations based on years of experience or practice setting. In high-risk women with prior chest radiation and an increased risk of breast cancer, for whom guidelines recommend mammography and MRI, 75.0% of providers recommended mammography, but only 44.3% recommended breast MRI. Recent continuing education on breast cancer screening was associated with providers being more comfortable giving high-risk screening recommendations (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Most primary care providers believe mammography is helpful in women at high risk for breast cancer. Less than half of practitioners, however, recommend breast MRI to screen women at high risk for breast cancer, despite guidelines promoting the use of breast MRI. Increased provider education is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Blaes
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Rachel I. Vogel
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Rebekah H. Nagler
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Alicia Allen
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Susan Mason
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Deanna Teoh
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Kristine Talley
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Nancy C. Raymond
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Jean F. Wyman
- Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Team (BIRCWH), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Neugut AI, MacLean SA, Dai WF, Jacobson JS. Physician Characteristics and Decisions Regarding Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. Popul Health Manag 2019; 22:48-62. [DOI: 10.1089/pop.2017.0206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Alfred I. Neugut
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
- Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | | | - Wei F. Dai
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | - Judith S. Jacobson
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Implementing Colon Cancer Screening Guidelines Into the Primary Care Setting. Gastroenterol Nurs 2018; 41:477-490. [PMID: 30489404 DOI: 10.1097/sga.0000000000000347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Colon cancer is the second leading cause of all cancers deaths. Despite public awareness, many healthcare providers and patients remain uninformed about colon cancer screening options alternative to colonoscopy. Research supports the lack of providers' education and patient knowledge. At a clinic for veterans in Central Florida, 2 educational presentations were delivered to primary care providers (N = 46) on the clinical pathway for colon cancer screening options. A pilot study with a quantitative pretest-post-test design was used to evaluate differences between screening orders 3 months before and after the presentations. A 10-item survey on the usefulness of the educational information was also administered to providers. Results of a 1-way analysis of variance indicated no significant differences between the two 3-month periods. However, with exclusion of the lowest month, a significance level resulted of .087, 91.3% confidence level. Survey responses indicated a positive impact, with most answers ranging from agree to strongly agree. The study revealed that the educational clinical pathway contributed to providers' increased recommendations of screening options and the educational information was useful. Additional research is recommended on the effectiveness of education and providers' use of screening options for colon cancer for average-risk veterans in healthcare institutions.
Collapse
|
10
|
Dodd N, Mansfield E, Carey M, Oldmeadow C, Sanson-Fisher R. Have we increased our efforts to identify strategies which encourage colorectal cancer screening in primary care patients? A review of research outputs over time. Prev Med Rep 2018; 11:100-104. [PMID: 29963366 PMCID: PMC6022456 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.05.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2018] [Revised: 05/16/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Globally, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain suboptimal. Primary care practitioners are supported by clinical practice guidelines which recommend they provide routine CRC screening advice. Published research can provide evidence to improve CRC screening in primary care, however this is dependent on the type and quality of evidence being produced. This review aimed to provide a snapshot of trends in the type and design quality of research reporting CRC screening among primary care patients across three time points: 1993-1995, 2003-2005 and 2013-2015. Four databases were searched using MeSH headings and keywords. Publications in peer-reviewed journals which reported primary data on CRC screening uptake among primary care patients were eligible for inclusion. Studies meeting eligibility criteria were coded as observational or intervention. Intervention studies were further coded to indicate whether or not they met Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) study design criteria. A total of 102 publications were included. Of these, 65 reported intervention studies and 37 reported observational studies. The proportion of each study type did not change significantly over time. The majority of intervention studies met EPOC design criteria at each time point. The majority of research in this field has focused on testing strategies to increase CRC screening in primary care patients, as compared to research describing rates of CRC screening in this population. Further research is needed to determine which effective interventions are most likely to be adopted into primary care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Dodd
- Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Elise Mansfield
- Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Mariko Carey
- Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Christopher Oldmeadow
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.,Clinical Research Design, IT and Statistical Support (CReDITSS), Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Rob Sanson-Fisher
- Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.,Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Smith MA, Weiss JM, Potvien A, Schumacher JR, Gangnon RE, Kim DH, Weeth-Feinstein LA, Pickhardt PJ. Insurance Coverage for CT Colonography Screening: Impact on Overall Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates. Radiology 2017; 284:717-724. [PMID: 28696184 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017170924] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
RSNA, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maureen A Smith
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Jennifer M Weiss
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Aaron Potvien
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Jessica R Schumacher
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Ronald E Gangnon
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - David H Kim
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Lauren A Weeth-Feinstein
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| | - Perry J Pickhardt
- From the Department of Population Health Sciences (M.A.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (M.A.S.), Department of Surgery (M.A.S., J.R.S.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W., L.A.W.F.), Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (R.E.G.), and Department of Radiology (D.H.K., P.J.P.), University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, 800 University Bay Dr, Room 210-31, Madison, WI 53705; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wis (M.A.S., J.M.W., R.E.G., D.H.K., L.A.W.F., P.J.P.); and Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Letters & Science, Madison, Wis (A.P.)
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dodd N, Carey ML, Mansfield E, Oldmeadow C. Testing the Effectiveness of a Primary Care Intervention to Improve Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc 2017; 6:e86. [PMID: 28490420 PMCID: PMC5443911 DOI: 10.2196/resprot.7432] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2017] [Revised: 04/02/2017] [Accepted: 04/02/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) significantly reduces mortality associated with this disease. In Australia, the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program provides regular fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) for those aged 50 to 74 years, however, participation rates in the program have plateaued at 36%. Given low uptake in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program, it is necessary to explore alternate methods to increase CRC screening rates. Primary care is a promising adjunct setting to test methods to increase CRC screening participation. Primary care guidelines support the recommendation and provision of CRC screening to primary care patients. Those in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program target age range frequently present to their primary care provider. OBJECTIVE This study tests the effect that a multicomponent primary care-based intervention has on CRC screening uptake when compared to usual care. METHODS Primary care patients presenting for an appointment with their primary care provider complete a touchscreen survey to determine eligibility for the trial. Those aged 50 to 74 years, at average risk of CRC, with no history of CRC or inflammatory bowel disease, who have not had an FOBT in the past 2 years or a colonoscopy in the past 5 years are eligible to participate in the trial. Trial participants are randomized to the intervention or usual care group by day of attendance at the practice. The intervention consists of provision of an FOBT, printed information sheet, and primary care provider endorsement to complete the FOBT. The usual care group receives no additional care. RESULTS The primary outcome is completion of CRC screening 6 weeks after recruitment. The proportion of patients completing CRC screening will be compared between trial groups using a logistic regression model. CONCLUSIONS CRC screening rates in Australia are suboptimal and interventions to increase screening participation are urgently required. This protocol describes the process of implementing a multicomponent intervention designed to increase CRC screening uptake in a primary care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001299493; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371136&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6pL0VYIj6). Universal Trial Number U1111-1185-6120.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Dodd
- University of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia
| | - Mariko Leanne Carey
- University of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia
| | - Elise Mansfield
- University of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia
| | - Christopher Oldmeadow
- University of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Clinical Research Design, Information Technology and Statistical Support, New Lambton Heights, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Nadeau M, Walaszek A, Perdue DG, Rhodes KL, Haverkamp D, Forster J. Influences and Practices in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Health Care Providers Serving Northern Plains American Indians, 2011-2012. Prev Chronic Dis 2016; 13:E167. [PMID: 27978410 PMCID: PMC5201146 DOI: 10.5888/pcd13.160267] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction The epidemiology of colorectal cancer, including incidence, mortality, age of onset, stage of diagnosis, and screening, varies regionally among American Indians. The objective of the Improving Northern Plains American Indian Colorectal Cancer Screening study was to improve understanding of colorectal cancer screening among health care providers serving Northern Plains American Indians. Methods Data were collected, in person, from a sample of 145 health care providers at 27 health clinics across the Northern Plains from May 2011 through September 2012. Participants completed a 32-question, self-administered assessment designed to assess provider practices, screening perceptions, and knowledge. Results The proportion of providers who ordered or performed at least 1 colorectal cancer screening test for an asymptomatic, average-risk patient in the previous month was 95.9% (139 of 145). Of these 139 providers, 97.1% ordered colonoscopies, 12.9% ordered flexible sigmoidoscopies, 73.4% ordered 3-card, guaiac-based, fecal occult blood tests, and 21.6% ordered fecal immunochemical tests. Nearly two-thirds (64.7%) reported performing in-office guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests using digital rectal examination specimens. Providers who reported receiving a formal update on colorectal cancer screening during the previous 24 months were more likely to screen using digital rectal exam specimens than providers who had received a formal update on colorectal cancer screening more than 24 months prior (73.9% vs 56.9%, respectively, χ2 = 4.29, P = .04). Conclusion Despite recommendations cautioning against the use of digital rectal examination specimens for colorectal cancer screening, the practice is common among providers serving Northern Plains American Indian populations. Accurate up-to-date, ongoing education for patients, the community, and health care providers is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie Nadeau
- North Dakota State University, Dept 2662, PO Box 6050, Fargo, ND 58108-6050.
| | - Anne Walaszek
- American Indian Cancer Foundation, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Donald Haverkamp
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends patient-physician discussions about the appropriateness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults ages 76-84 years who have never been screened. In this study, we used data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey to examine patterns of CRC screening and provider recommendation among seniors ages 76-84 years, and made some comparisons to younger adults. Nationally-representative samples of 1379 adults ages 76-84 years and 8797 adults ages 50-75 years responded to questions about CRC screening status, receipt of provider recommendation, and discussion of test options; 22.7% (95% CI 20.1-25.3) of seniors ages 76-84 had never been tested for CRC and therefore were not up-to-date with guidelines; 3.9% (95% CI 2.0-7.6) of these individuals reported a recent provider recommendation for screening. In multivariate analyses, the likelihood of never having been tested was significantly greater for seniors of other/multiple race or Hispanic ethnicity; with high school or less education; without private health insurance coverage; who had ≤ 1 doctor visit in the past year; without recent screening for breast, cervical, or prostate cancer; with no or unknown CRC family history; or with ≤ 1 chronic disease. Among the minority of respondents ages 50-75 and 76-84 reporting a provider recommendation, 73.2% indicated that the provider recommended particular tests, which was overwhelmingly colonoscopy (≥ 89 %). Nearly one-quarter of adults 76-84 have never been screened for CRC, and rates of provider recommendation in this group are very low. Greater attention to informed CRC screening discussions with screening-eligible seniors is needed.
Collapse
|
15
|
Chou AF, Rose DE, Farmer M, Canelo I, Yano EM. Organizational Factors Affecting the Likelihood of Cancer Screening Among VA Patients. Med Care 2016; 53:1040-9. [PMID: 26569643 DOI: 10.1097/mlr.0000000000000449] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preventive service delivery, including cancer screenings, continues to pose a challenge to quality improvement efforts. Although many studies have focused on person-level characteristics associated with screening, less is known about organizational influences on cancer screening. OBJECTIVES This study aims to understand the association between organizational factors and adherence to cancer screenings. METHODS This study employed a cross-sectional design using organizational-level, patient-level, and area-level data. Dependent variables included breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Organizational factors describing resource sufficiency were constructed using factor analyses from a survey of 250 Veterans Affairs primary care directors. We conducted random-effects logistic regression analyses, modeling cancer screening as a function of organizational factors, controlling for patient-level and area-level factors. RESULTS Overall, 87% of the patients received mammograms, 92% received cervical and 78% had colorectal screening. Quality improvement orientation increased the odds of cervical [odds ratio (OR): 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.57] and colorectal cancer screening (OR: 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00-1.20). Authority in determining primary care components increased the odds of mammography screening (OR: 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.51). Sufficiency in clinical staffing increased the odds of mammography and cervical cancer screenings. Several patient-level factors, serving as control variables, were associated with achievement of screenings. CONCLUSIONS Resource sufficiency led to increased odds of screening possibly because they promote excellence in patient care by conveying organizational goals and facilitate goal achievement with resources. Complementary to patient-level factors, our findings identified organizational processes associated with better performance, which offer concrete strategies in which facilities can evaluate their capabilities to implement best practices to foster and sustain a culture of quality care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann F Chou
- *University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK †VA Greater Los Angeles HSR&D Center for the Study of Innovation, Implementation, and Policy, North Hills, CA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Dolan NC, Ramirez-Zohfeld V, Rademaker AW, Ferreira MR, Galanter WL, Radosta J, Eder MM, Cameron KA. The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients. J Gen Intern Med 2015; 30:1780-7. [PMID: 25986137 PMCID: PMC4636583 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3381-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2014] [Revised: 03/16/2015] [Accepted: 04/15/2015] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Physician recommendation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a critical facilitator of screening completion. Providing patients a choice of screening options may increase CRC screening completion, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. OBJECTIVE Our purpose was to assess the effectiveness of physician-only and physician-patient interventions on increasing rates of CRC screening discussions as compared to usual care. DESIGN This study was quasi-experimental. Clinics were allocated to intervention or usual care; patients in intervention clinics were randomized to receipt of patient intervention. PARTICIPANTS Patients aged 50 to 75 years, due for CRC screening, receiving care at either a federally qualified health care center or an academic health center participated in the study. INTERVENTION Intervention physicians received continuous quality improvement and communication skills training. Intervention patients watched an educational video immediately before their appointment. MAIN MEASURES Rates of patient-reported 1) CRC screening discussions, and 2) discussions of more than one screening test. KEY RESULTS The physician-patient intervention (n = 167) resulted in higher rates of CRC screening discussions compared to both physician-only intervention (n = 183; 61.1 % vs.50.3 %, p = 0.008) and usual care (n = 153; 61.1 % vs. 34.0 % p = 0.03). More discussions of specific CRC screening tests and discussions of more than one test occurred in the intervention arms than in usual care (44.6 % vs. 22.9 %,p = 0.03) and (5.1 % vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.036), respectively, but discussion of more than one test was uncommon. Across all arms, 143 patients (28.4 %) reported discussion of colonoscopy only; 21 (4.2 %) reported discussion of both colonoscopy and stool tests. CONCLUSIONS Compared to usual care and a physician-only intervention, a physician-patient intervention increased rates of CRC screening discussions, yet discussions overwhelmingly focused solely on colonoscopy. In underserved patient populations where access to colonoscopy may be limited, interventions encouraging discussions of both stool tests and colonoscopy may be needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy C Dolan
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 675 N. St. Clair St. Suite 18-200, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
| | - Vanessa Ramirez-Zohfeld
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 675 N. St. Clair St. Suite 18-200, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
| | - Alfred W Rademaker
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - M Rosario Ferreira
- Division of Gastroenterology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - William L Galanter
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jonathan Radosta
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Milton Mickey Eder
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Kenzie A Cameron
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 675 N. St. Clair St. Suite 18-200, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Johnson MR, Grubber J, Grambow SC, Maciejewski ML, Dunn-Thomas T, Provenzale D, Fisher DA. Physician Non-adherence to Colonoscopy Interval Guidelines in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. Gastroenterology 2015; 149:938-51. [PMID: 26122143 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.06.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2014] [Revised: 06/17/2015] [Accepted: 06/19/2015] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Colonoscopy can decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality, although performing this procedure more frequently than recommended could increase costs and risks to patients. We aimed to determine rates and correlates of physician non-adherence to guidelines for repeat colonoscopy screening and polyp surveillance intervals. METHODS We performed a multi-center, retrospective, observational study using administrative claims, physician databases, and electronic medical records (EMR) from 1455 patients (50-64 y old) who underwent colonoscopy in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system in fiscal year 2008. Patients had no prior diagnosis of CRC or inflammatory bowel disease, and had not undergone colonoscopy examinations in the previous 10 years. We compared EMR-documented, endoscopist-recommended intervals for colonoscopies with intervals recommended by the 2008 Multi-Society Task Force guidelines. RESULTS The overall rate of non-adherence to guideline recommendations was 36% and ranged from 3% to 80% among facilities. Non-adherence was 28% for patients who underwent normal colonoscopies, but 45%-52% after colonoscopies that identified hyperplastic or adenomatous polyps. Most of all recommendations that were not followed recommended a shorter surveillance interval. In adjusted analyses, non-adherence was significantly higher for patients whose colonoscopies identified hyperplastic (odds ratio [OR] = 3.1; 95% CI, 1.7-5.5) or high-risk adenomatous polyps (OR = 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2-8.0), compared to patients with normal colonoscopy examinations, but not for patients with low-risk adenomatous polyps (OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9-3.7). Nonadherence was also associated with bowel preparation quality, geographic region, Charlson comorbidity score, and colonoscopy indication. CONCLUSIONS In a managed care setting with salaried physicians, endoscopists recommend repeat colonoscopy sooner than guidelines for more than one third of patients. Factors associated with non-adherence to guideline recommendations were colonoscopy findings, quality of bowel preparation, and geographic region. Targeting endoscopist about non-adherence to colonoscopy guidelines could reduce overuse of colonoscopy and associated healthcare costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcus R Johnson
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Janet Grubber
- Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Steven C Grambow
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Matthew L Maciejewski
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Tyra Dunn-Thomas
- Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Dawn Provenzale
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Deborah A Fisher
- Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a complex disease that develops as a consequence of both genetic and environmental risk factors. A small proportion (3-5%) of cases arise from hereditary syndromes predisposing to early onset CRC as a result of mutations in over a dozen well defined genes. In contrast, CRC is predominantly a late onset 'sporadic' disease, developing in individuals with no obvious hereditary syndrome. In recent years, genome wide association studies have discovered that over 40 genetic regions are associated with weak effects on sporadic CRC, and it has been estimated that increasingly large genome wide scans will identify many additional novel genetic regions. Subsequent experimental validations have identified the causally related variant(s) in a limited number of these genetic regions. Further biological insight could be obtained through ethnically diverse study populations, larger genetic sequencing studies and development of higher throughput functional experiments. Along with inherited variation, integration of the tumour genome may shed light on the carcinogenic processes in CRC. In addition to summarising the genetic architecture of CRC, this review discusses genetic factors that modify environmental predictors of CRC, as well as examples of how genetic insight has improved clinical surveillance, prevention and treatment strategies. In summary, substantial progress has been made in uncovering the genetic architecture of CRC, and continued research efforts are expected to identify additional genetic risk factors that further our biological understanding of this disease. Subsequently these new insights will lead to improved treatment and prevention of colorectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrike Peters
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Stephanie Bien
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Niha Zubair
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Brown T, Lee JY, Park J, Nelson CA, McBurnie MA, Liss DT, Kaleba EO, Henley E, Harigopal P, Grant L, Crawford P, Carroll JE, Alperovitz-Bichell K, Baker DW. Colorectal cancer screening at community health centers: A survey of clinicians' attitudes, practices, and perceived barriers. Prev Med Rep 2015; 2:886-91. [PMID: 26844165 PMCID: PMC4721393 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2015.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain lower among some racial/ethnic groups and individuals with low income or educational attainment who are often cared for within community health centers (CHCs). We surveyed clinicians in a network of CHCs to understand their attitudes, practice patterns, and perceived barriers to CRC screening. Methods A clinician survey was conducted in 2013 within the Community Health Applied Research Network (CHARN). Results 180 clinicians completed the survey (47.9% response rate). Participants had an average of 11.5 (SD: 9.8) years in practice, 62% were female, and 57% were physicians. The majority of respondents somewhat agreed (30.2%) or strongly agreed (57.5%) that colonoscopy was the best screening test. However, only 15.8% of respondents strongly agreed and 32.2% somewhat agreed that colonoscopy was readily available for their patients. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), a type of fecal occult blood test (FOBT), was viewed less favorably; 24.6% rated FIT as very effective. Conclusions Although there are no data showing that screening colonoscopy is superior to FIT, CHC clinicians believe colonoscopy is the best CRC screening test for their patients, despite the high prevalence of financial barriers to colonoscopy. These attitudes could be due to lack of knowledge about the evidence supporting long-term benefits of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), lack of awareness about the improved test characteristics of FIT compared to older guaiac-based FOBT, or the absence of systems to ensure adherence to regular FOBT screening. Interventions to improve CRC screening at CHCs must address clinicians' negative attitudes towards FIT. We surveyed primary care clinicians in a nationwide network of Community Health Centers. The vast majority believed that colonoscopy was the best screening test for colorectal cancer. However, less than half agreed that colonoscopy was readily available for their patients. Fecal occult blood testing was viewed far less favorably than colonoscopy. These attitudes and barriers must be overcome to improve screening and reduce disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiffany Brown
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine-Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Ji Young Lee
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine-Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Jessica Park
- Alliance of Chicago Community Health Services-Chicago, IL, United States
| | | | - Mary Ann McBurnie
- Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research-Portland, OR, United States
| | - David T Liss
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine-Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Erin O Kaleba
- Alliance of Chicago Community Health Services-Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Eric Henley
- North Country HealthCare-Flagstaff, AZ, United States
| | | | - Laura Grant
- Chase Brexton Health Care-Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Phil Crawford
- Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research-Portland, OR, United States
| | | | | | - David W Baker
- Division of Healthcare Quality Evaluation, The Joint Commission-Oakbrook Terrace, IL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Young L, Kim J, Wang H, Chen LW. Examining Factors Influencing Colorectal Cancer Screening of Rural Nebraskans Using Data from Clinics Participating in an Accountable Care Organization: A Study Protocol. F1000Res 2015; 4:298. [PMID: 26339476 PMCID: PMC4544372 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.6782.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/20/2015] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Although mortality rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) can be significantly reduced through increased screening, rural communities are still experiencing lower rates of screening compared to urban counterparts. Understanding and eliminating barriers to cancer screening will decrease cancer burden and lead to substantial gains in quality and quantity of life for rural populations. However, existing studies have shown inconsistent findings and fail to address how contextual and provider-level factors impact CRC screening in addition to individual-level factors. Purpose: The purpose of the study is to examine multi-level factors related to CRC screening, and providers’ perception of barriers and facilitators of CRC screening in rural patients cared for by accountable care organization (ACO) clinics. Methods/Design: This is a convergent mixed method design. For the quantitative component, multiple data sources, such as electronic health records (EHRs), Area Resource File (ARF), and provider survey data, will be used to examine patient-, provider-, clinic-, and county-level factors. About 21,729 rural patients aged between 50 and 75 years who visited the participating ACO clinics in the past 12 months are included in the quantitative analysis. The qualitative methods include semi-structured in-depth interviews with healthcare professionals in selected rural clinics. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be merged for result interpretation. Quantitative data identifies “what” factors influence CRC screening, while qualitative data explores “how” these factors interact with CRC screening. The study setting is 10 ACO clinics located in nine rural Nebraska counties. Discussion: This will be the first study examining multi-level factors related to CRC screening in the new healthcare delivery system (i.e., ACO clinics) in rural communities. The study findings will enhance our understanding of how the ACO model, particularly in rural areas, interacts with provider- and patient-level factors influencing the CRC screening rate of rural patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lufei Young
- College of Nursing, Lincoln Division, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA
| | - Jungyoon Kim
- Department of Health Service Research and Administration, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Public Health, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA
| | - Hongmei Wang
- Department of Health Service Research and Administration, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Public Health, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA
| | - Li-Wu Chen
- Department of Health Service Research and Administration, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Public Health, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Heterogeneous demographic and cultural profiles of Chinese American patients nonadherent to colorectal cancer screening: a latent class analysis. Cancer Nurs 2015; 37:106-13. [PMID: 23519040 DOI: 10.1097/ncc.0b013e3182888b5b] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death in Chinese Americans, but their CRC screening rates remain low. OBJECTIVE We examined subgroups of Chinese American patients nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines to better inform clinical practices to effectively promote screening. METHODS Using latent class analysis of data from 327 participants recruited from 18 primary care clinics, we classified nonadherent patients based on sociodemographics, screening barriers, and attitudinal and clinical factors for CRC screening. RESULTS The best-fitting latent class analysis model described 3 distinctive classes: Western healthcare class (36%), Eastern healthcare class (18%), and mixed healthcare class (46%). Western healthcare class patients were highly educated, with average US residency of 20 years, a high level of English proficiency, the least Eastern cultural views of care, and the greatest exposure to physician recommendations, but reported having no time for screenings. Eastern healthcare class patients were highly educated seniors and recent immigrants with the least CRC knowledge and the most Eastern cultural views. Mixed healthcare class patients had low level of education, resided in the United States for 20 years, and half had sought services of their physicians for at least 3 years, but their knowledge and cultural views were similar to those of Eastern healthcare class patients. CONCLUSIONS Nonadherent Chinese American patients are heterogeneous. It is essential to have future intervention programs tailored to address specific screening beliefs and barriers for subtypes of nonadherent patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Training primary care physicians to recognize patients' different demographic characteristics and healthcare beliefs may facilitate physicians' communication with patients to overcome their barriers and improve screening behaviors.
Collapse
|
22
|
Ramsey AT, Maki J, Prusaczyk B, Yan Y, Wang J, Lobb R. Using segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series data to assess colonoscopy quality outcomes of a web-enhanced implementation toolkit to support evidence-based practices for bowel preparation: a study protocol. Implement Sci 2015; 10:85. [PMID: 26050105 PMCID: PMC4465008 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0276-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2015] [Accepted: 06/02/2015] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND While there is convincing evidence on interventions to improve bowel preparation for patients, the evidence on how to implement these evidence-based practices (EBPs) in outpatient colonoscopy settings is less certain. The Strategies to Improve Colonoscopy (STIC) study compares the effect of two implementation strategies, physician education alone versus physician education plus an implementation toolkit for staff, on adoption of three EBPs (split-dosing of bowel preparation, low-literacy education, teach-back) to improve pre-procedure and intra-procedure quality measures. The implementation toolkit contains a staff education module, website containing tools to support staff in delivering EBPs, tailored patient education materials, and brief consultation with staff to determine how the EBPs can be integrated into the existing workflow. Given adaptations to the implementation plan and intentional flexibility in the delivery of the EBPs, we utilize a pragmatic study to balance external validity with demonstrating effectiveness of the implementation strategies. METHODS/DESIGN Participants will include all outpatient colonoscopy physicians, staff, and patients from a convenience sample of six endoscopy settings. Aim #1 will explore the relative effect of two strategies to implement patient-level EBPs on adoption and clinical quality outcomes. We will assess the change in level and trends of clinical quality outcomes (i.e., adequacy of bowel preparation, adenoma detection) using segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series data with two groups (intervention and delayed start). Aim #2 will examine the influence of organizational readiness to change on EBP implementation. We use a PRECIS diagram to reflect the extent to which each indicator of the study was pragmatic versus explanatory, revealing a largely pragmatic study. DISCUSSION Implementation challenges have already motivated several adaptations to the original plan, reflecting the nature of implementation in real-world healthcare settings. The pragmatic study responds to the evolving needs of its healthcare partners and allows for flexibility in intervention delivery, thereby informing clinical decision-making in real-world settings. The current study will provide information about what works (intervention effectiveness), for whom it works (influence of Medicaid versus other insurance), in which contexts it works (setting characteristics that influence implementation), and how it works best (comparison of implementation strategies).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex T Ramsey
- Washington University Brown School of Social Work, 1 Brookings Dr., St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA.
| | - Julia Maki
- Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| | - Beth Prusaczyk
- Washington University Brown School of Social Work, 1 Brookings Dr., St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA.
| | - Yan Yan
- Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| | - Jean Wang
- Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| | - Rebecca Lobb
- Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Lafata JE, Wunderlich T, Flocke SA, Oja-Tebbe N, Dyer KE, Siminoff LA. Physician use of persuasion and colorectal cancer screening. Transl Behav Med 2015; 5:87-93. [PMID: 25729457 DOI: 10.1007/s13142-014-0284-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
The impact of patient-physician communication on subsequent patient behavior has rarely been evaluated in the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening discussions. We describe physicians' use of persuasive techniques when recommending CRC screening and evaluate its association with patients' subsequent adherence to screening. Audio recordings of N = 414 periodic health examinations were joined with screening use data from electronic medical records and pre-/post-visit patient surveys. The association between persuasion and screening was assessed using generalized estimating equations. According to observer ratings, primary care physicians frequently use persuasive techniques (63 %) when recommending CRC screening, most commonly argument or refutation. However, physician persuasion was not associated with subsequent screening adherence. Physician use of persuasion may be a common vehicle for information provision during CRC screening discussions; however, our results do not support the sole reliance on persuasive techniques if the goal is to improve adherence to recommended screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Elston Lafata
- Henry Ford Health System, MI, USA, Detroit, MI USA ; Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA USA
| | - Tracy Wunderlich
- Henry Ford Health System, MI, USA, Detroit, MI USA ; Oakland University, Detroit, MI USA
| | | | | | - Karen E Dyer
- Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Horne HN, Phelan-Emrick DF, Pollack CE, Markakis D, Wenzel J, Ahmed S, Garza MA, Shapiro GR, Bone LR, Johnson LB, Ford JG. Effect of patient navigation on colorectal cancer screening in a community-based randomized controlled trial of urban African American adults. Cancer Causes Control 2014; 26:239-246. [PMID: 25516073 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-014-0505-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2014] [Accepted: 11/27/2014] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates have increased steadily in the USA, though racial and ethnic disparities persist. In a community-based randomized controlled trial, we investigated the effect of patient navigation on increasing CRC screening adherence among older African Americans. METHODS Participants in the Cancer Prevention and Treatment Demonstration were randomized to either the control group, receiving only printed educational materials (PEM), or the intervention arm where they were assigned a patient navigator in addition to PEM. Navigators assisted participants with identifying and overcoming screening barriers. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess the effect of patient navigation on CRC screening adherence. Up-to-date with screening was defined as self-reported receipt of colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy in the previous 10 years or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in the year prior to the exit interview. RESULTS Compared with controls, the intervention group was more likely to report being up-to-date with CRC screening at the exit interview (OR 1.55, 95 % CI 1.07-2.23), after adjusting for select demographics. When examining the screening modalities separately, the patient navigator increased screening for colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy (OR 1.53, 95 % CI 1.07-2.19), but not FOBT screening. Analyses of moderation revealed stronger effects of navigation among participants 65-69 years and those with an adequate health literacy level. CONCLUSIONS In a population of older African Americans adults, patient navigation was effective in increasing the likelihood of CRC screening. However, more intensive navigation may be necessary for adults over 70 years and individuals with low literacy levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hisani N Horne
- Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA.
- National Institutes of Health/NCI/DCEG/HREB, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rm 7E234, MSC 7234, Bethesda, MD, 20892-7234, USA.
| | - Darcy F Phelan-Emrick
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Craig E Pollack
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of General Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Diane Markakis
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jennifer Wenzel
- Department of Oncology, Department of Acute and Chronic Care, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Saifuddin Ahmed
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health and Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mary A Garza
- Department of Behavioral and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD, USA
| | - Gary R Shapiro
- Health Partners Cancer Program and Institute for Education and Research, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Lee R Bone
- Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Jean G Ford
- The Brooklyn Hospital Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Laiyemo AO, Adebogun AO, Doubeni CA, Ricks-Santi L, McDonald-Pinkett S, Young PE, Cash BD, Klabunde CN. Influence of provider discussion and specific recommendation on colorectal cancer screening uptake among U.S. adults. Prev Med 2014; 67:1-5. [PMID: 24967957 PMCID: PMC4167462 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.06.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2014] [Revised: 04/29/2014] [Accepted: 06/16/2014] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES It is unclear if provider recommendations regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities affect patient compliance. We evaluated provider-patient communications about CRC screening with and without a specific screening modality recommendation on patient compliance with screening guidelines. METHODS We used the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) and identified 4283 respondents who were at least 50 years of age and answered questions about their communication with their care providers and CRC screening uptake. We defined being compliant with CRC screening as the use of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) within 1 year, sigmoidoscopy within 5 years, or colonoscopy within 10 years. We used survey weights in all analyses. RESULTS CRC screening discussions occurred with 3320 (76.2%) respondents. Approximately 95% of these discussions were with physicians. Overall, 2793 (62.6%) respondents were current with CRC screening regardless of the screening modality. Discussion about screening (odds ratio (OR)=8.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 7.20-10.84) and providers making a specific recommendation about screening modality rather than leaving it to the patient to decide (OR=2.04; 95% CI: 1.54-2.68) were associated with patient compliance with CRC screening guidelines. CONCLUSION Compliance with CRC screening guidelines is improved when providers discuss options and make specific screening test recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adeyinka O Laiyemo
- Department of Medicine, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA; Biometry Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Akeem O Adebogun
- Department of Medicine, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at the Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Leonard Davis Institute for Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Center for Public Health Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Luisel Ricks-Santi
- Cancer Research Center, Department of Biological Sciences, Hampton University, Hampton, VA, USA
| | | | - Patrick E Young
- Department of Medicine, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Brooks D Cash
- Department of Medicine, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Carrie N Klabunde
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Alsuwaida A, AlSharidi A, AlAnazi N, AlGhamdi M, AlMeshal M, AlJaser R, AlAnazi R, Alkhalaf A. Health and well-being among physicians. Intern Med J 2014; 43:1310-5. [PMID: 23869516 DOI: 10.1111/imj.12249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2013] [Accepted: 07/07/2013] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM Physicians' attitudes towards disease prevention are crucial. The purposes of this study are to examine the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and adherence to international preventive screening programmes by a group of physicians. METHODS Online and paper format questionnaires were completed by a sample of 650 physicians from November 2010 to March 2011. The collected data included the main components of screening programmes, which are recommended in international guidelines. RESULTS The data show that 30.5% of male physicians currently smoke, 19.4 % are obese, 15.2% have hypertension, 38% are physically inactive and 10.9% have diabetes. Nearly all (95%) of the female participants and most (83%) of the male participants older than 45 years had never had a colonoscopy. Of the male physicians older than 55 years, 36.4% had never had prostate-specific antigen testing, and only 10.9% had undergone a digital rectal examination. Among the female physicians, 27.4% were obese, and 42% had never had a mammogram. CONCLUSION The prevalence of behavioural risk factors for cardiovascular disease is high among physicians. A substantial percentage of the practising physicians did not adhere to the age-specified preventive screening measures recommended in international guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Alsuwaida
- Department of Medicine, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Price-Haywood EG, Harden-Barrios J, Cooper LA. Comparative effectiveness of audit-feedback versus additional physician communication training to improve cancer screening for patients with limited health literacy. J Gen Intern Med 2014; 29:1113-21. [PMID: 24590734 PMCID: PMC4099465 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-014-2782-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2013] [Revised: 12/05/2013] [Accepted: 12/27/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We designed a continuing medical education (CME) program to teach primary care physicians (PCP) how to engage in cancer risk communication and shared decision making with patients who have limited health literacy (HL). OBJECTIVE We evaluated whether training PCPs, in addition to audit-feedback, improves their communication behaviors and increases cancer screening among patients with limited HL to a greater extent than only providing clinical performance feedback. DESIGN Four-year cluster randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS Eighteen PCPs and 168 patients with limited HL who were overdue for colorectal/breast/cervical cancer screening. INTERVENTIONS Communication intervention PCPs received skills training that included standardized patient (SP) feedback on counseling behaviors. All PCPs underwent chart audits of patients' screening status semiannually up to 24 months and received two annual performance feedback reports. MAIN MEASURES PCPs experienced three unannounced SP encounters during which SPs rated PCP communication behaviors. We examined between-group differences in changes in SP ratings and patient knowledge of cancer screening guidelines over 12 months; and changes in patient cancer screening rates over 24 months. KEY RESULTS There were no group differences in SP ratings of physician communication at baseline. At follow-up, communication intervention PCPs were rated higher in general communication about cancer risks and shared decision making related to colorectal cancer screening compared to PCPs who only received performance feedback. Screening rates increased among patients of PCPs in both groups; however, there were no between-group differences in screening rates except for mammography. The communication intervention did not improve patient cancer screening knowledge. CONCLUSION Compared to audit and feedback alone, including PCP communication training increases PCP patient-centered counseling behaviors, but not cancer screening among patients with limited HL. Larger studies must be conducted to determine whether lack of changes in cancer screening were due to clinic/patient sample size versus ineffectiveness of communication training to change outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eboni G Price-Haywood
- Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, 1430 Tulane Avenue, SL-16, New Orleans, LA, 70112, USA,
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Tiro JA, Kamineni A, Levin TR, Zheng Y, Schottinger JS, Rutter CM, Corley DA, Skinner CS, Chubak J, Doubeni CA, Halm EA, Gupta S, Wernli KJ, Klabunde C. The colorectal cancer screening process in community settings: a conceptual model for the population-based research optimizing screening through personalized regimens consortium. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014; 23:1147-58. [PMID: 24917182 PMCID: PMC4148641 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-1217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Reducing colorectal cancer mortality by promoting screening has been a national goal for two decades. The NCI's Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium is the first federal initiative to foster coordinated, transdisciplinary research evaluating the entire cancer screening process in community settings. PROSPR is creating a central data repository to facilitate research evaluating the breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening process across different patient populations, provider types, and delivery systems. Data are being collected and organized at the multiple levels in which individuals are nested (e.g., healthcare systems, facilities, providers, and patients). Here, we describe a conceptual model of the colorectal cancer screening process guiding data collection and highlight critical research questions that will be addressed through pooled data. We also describe the three research centers focused on colorectal cancer screening with respect to study populations, practice settings, and screening policies. PROSPR comprehensively elucidates the complex screening process through observational study, and has potential to improve care delivery beyond the healthcare systems studied. Findings will inform intervention designs and policies to optimize colorectal cancer screening delivery and advance the Institute of Medicine's goals of effective, efficient, coordinated, timely, and safe health care with respect to evidence-based cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasmin A Tiro
- Authors' Affiliations: Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas;
| | | | | | - Yingye Zheng
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | | | | | | - Celette S Skinner
- Authors' Affiliations: Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Chyke A Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Ethan A Halm
- Authors' Affiliations: Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Samir Gupta
- Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego; Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Hawley S, Lillie S, Cooper G, Elston Lafata J. Managed care patients' preferences, physician recommendations, and colon cancer screening. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MANAGED CARE 2014; 20:555-561. [PMID: 25295401 PMCID: PMC4358777] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
Objective To evaluate associations between patients' preferences for attributes of different colorectal (CRC) screening modalities, physician CRC screening recommendations during periodic health exams, and subsequent utilization of screening 12 months later in a large health maintenance organization (HMO). Study Design Multi-method study including baseline surveys from average-risk HMO members joined with audio recordings of 415 periodic health exams (PHEs) and electronic medical record (EMR) data. Methods Patient ratings of test attributes were used to create an algorithm reflecting type and strength of CRC screening modality preference at baseline. Physician recommendations were obtained from audio recordings. Attribute-based test preferences and physician recommendations were compared with CRC test use using chisquare tests. Associations between attribute-based preferences and physician recommendations were assessed using logistic regression. Results Based on attribute rankings, most participants had a weak preference for colonoscopy (COL) (41%), an unclear preference (22.4%), or a weak preference for fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) (18.6%). About half (56%) of patients were screened at 12 months and there was no statistical association between attribute preferences and type of test received. Patients were significantly more likely to receive a recommendation including a test other than COL when they had an attribute-based test preference for FOBT (odds ratio [OR]: 2.17; 95% CI, 1.26-3.71; P < .01). Conclusions CRC screening test use in this large HMO was generally low. It was not associated with patients' preferences for different attributes of CRC screening tests but was associated with physician recommendations. Physicians may have better success in getting patients to screen if they consider preferences for test attributes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Hawley
- University of Michigan, North Campus Research Complex, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48109. E-mail:
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Informed choice vs. no choice in colorectal cancer screening tests: a prospective cohort study in real-life screening practice. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109:1072-9. [PMID: 24935273 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2014.136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2014] [Accepted: 04/25/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to compare the level of adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs among screening participants offered vs. not offered informed choices on screening modality. METHODS We recruited 10,606 screening participants aged 50-70 years, including 6,397 subjects who were offered a choice of yearly fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for up to 3 years vs. one colonoscopy, and 4,209 subjects who were offered either FIT or colonoscopy without choice. They were prospectively followed up for 3 years. The proportion of screening participants who returned their specimens in all subsequent years (FIT group) and the attendance rate of scheduled endoscopy appointment (colonoscopy group) were compared between those with vs. without choice. RESULTS The adherence rate with FIT was 97.6%, 84.1%, and 72.6% in the first 3 years of follow-up, respectively, among those who were offered a choice. The adherence rate with FIT was 97.5%, 78.4%, and 62.8%, respectively, among those without choices. The proportion of subjects attending colonoscopy was 95.7% (choice offered) and 90.6% (no choice). From binary logistic regression analysis, participants who were offered informed choice were significantly more likely to adhere to the program when compared with those without test choices (odds ratio (OR)=2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.30-2.82, P<0.001). The respective adjusted OR for the FIT and colonoscopy groups was 1.60 (95% CI: 1.42-1.80, P<0.001) and 2.53 (95% CI: 1.94-3.31, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS This study found that patients who were offered an informed choice for screening had higher adherence rates than patients who were not offered a choice in real-life practices, suggesting that providing screening test options for CRC screening is preferred.
Collapse
|
31
|
Halley MC, Rendle KAS, Frosch DL. A conceptual model of the multiple stages of communication necessary to support patient-centered care. J Comp Eff Res 2014; 2:421-33. [PMID: 24236683 DOI: 10.2217/cer.13.46] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Patient-centered care requires that both healthcare providers and patients have access to comparative effectiveness research (CER), which provides direct comparisons of the risks and benefits of available clinical options. However, insufficient attention has been paid to developing the comprehensive communication systems necessary to ensure that CER reaches patients and healthcare providers. In this review, we propose a model of the multiple stages of CER communication necessary for patient-centered care and review the existing research and gaps in knowledge relevant to each stage. These stages include: promotion of the underlying concepts and value of CER; translation of CER results; dissemination of CER results; and utilization of the results of CER in shared decision-making between patients and providers. A comprehensive approach to CER communication is necessary to ensure that the growing interest in and availability of CER is able to support a more patient-centered model of healthcare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meghan C Halley
- Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, 795 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94301, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Brown ML, Klabunde CN, Cronin KA, White MC, Richardson LC, McNeel TS. Challenges in meeting Healthy People 2020 objectives for cancer-related preventive services, National Health Interview Survey, 2008 and 2010. Prev Chronic Dis 2014; 11:E29. [PMID: 24576396 PMCID: PMC3938963 DOI: 10.5888/pcd11.130174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Healthy People (HP) is the US program that formulates and tracks national health objectives for the nation. The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is a designated data source for setting and evaluating several HP targets in cancer. We used data from the 2008 and 2010 NHIS to provide a benchmark for national performance toward meeting HP 2020 cancer-related objectives. METHODS HP 2020 cancer screening, provider counseling, and health care access objectives were selected. For each objective, NHIS measures for the overall population and several sociodemographic subgroups were calculated; the findings were compared with established HP 2020 targets. RESULTS From 2008 to 2010, rates of breast and cervical cancer screening declined slightly while colorectal cancer screening rates increased by 7 percentage points. Rates of cancer screening and provider counseling were below HP targets. Meeting HP targets seems less likely for subgroups characterized by low income, no health insurance, or no usual source of care. Meeting HP targets for access to health services will require an increase of 18 percentage points in the proportion of persons under age 65 with health insurance coverage and an increase of 10 percentage points in the proportion aged 18 to 64 with a usual source of care. CONCLUSION Whether HP objectives for cancer screening and health care access are met may depend on implementation of health care reform measures that improve access to and coordination of care. Better integration of clinical health care and community-based efforts for delivering high-quality screening and treatment services and elimination of health disparities are also needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Mary C White
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Gwede CK, Davis SN, Quinn GP, Koskan AM, Ealey J, Abdulla R, Vadaparampil ST, Elliott G, Lopez D, Shibata D, Roetzheim RG, Meade CD. Making it work: health care provider perspectives on strategies to increase colorectal cancer screening in federally qualified health centers. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2013; 28:777-783. [PMID: 23943277 PMCID: PMC3864594 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-013-0531-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) rates are low among men and women who seek health care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). This study explores health care providers' perspectives about their patient's motivators and impediments to CRCS and receptivity to preparatory education. A mixed methods design consisting of in-depth interviews, focus groups, and a short survey is used in this study. The participants of this study are 17 health care providers practicing in FQHCs in the Tampa Bay area. Test-specific patient impediments and motivations were identified including fear of abnormal findings, importance of offering less invasive fecal occult blood tests, and need for patient-centered test-specific educational materials in clinics. Opportunities to improve provider practices were identified including providers' reliance on patients' report of symptoms as a cue to recommend CRCS and overemphasis of clinic-based guaiac stool tests. This study adds to the literature on CRCS test-specific motivators and impediments. Providers offered unique approaches for motivating patients to follow through with recommended CRCS and were receptive to in-clinic patient education. Findings readily inform the design of educational materials and interventions to increase CRCS in FQHCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clement K Gwede
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Rosenwasser LA, McCall-Hosenfeld JS, Weisman CS, Hillemeier MM, Perry AN, Chuang CH. Barriers to colorectal cancer screening among women in rural central Pennsylvania: primary care physicians' perspective. Rural Remote Health 2013; 13:2504. [PMID: 24099635 PMCID: PMC4050077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/02/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of death among women in the USA. Rural populations have lower rates of CRC screening than their urban counterparts, and rural women have lower screening rates compared with rural men. The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify (1) beliefs of primary care physicians (PCPs) about CRC screening in rural communities, (2) factors that may cause gender disparities in CRC screening in rural areas, and (3) solutions to overcome those barriers. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 PCPs practicing in rural central Pennsylvania. PCPs were asked about their CRC screening practices for women, availability of CRC screening services, reminder systems for CRC screening, and barriers to screening specific to their rural communities and to gender. Thematic analysis was used to identify major themes. RESULTS All 17 PCPs endorsed the importance of CRC screening, but believed that there are barriers to CRC screening specific to women and to rural location. All PCPs identified colonoscopy as their screening method of choice, and generally reported that access to colonoscopy services in their rural areas was not a significant barrier. Barriers to CRC screening for women in rural communities were related to (1) PCPs' CRC screening practices, (2) gender-specific barriers to CRC screening, (3) patient-related barriers, (4) community-related barriers, and (5) physician practice-related barriers. Physicians overwhelmingly identified patient education as necessary for improving CRC screening in their rural communities, but believed that education would have to come from a source outside the rural primary care office due to lack of resources, personnel, and time. CONCLUSION Overall, the PCPs in this study were motivated to identify ways to improve their ability to engage more eligible patients in CRC screening. These findings suggest several interventions to potentially improve CRC screening for women in rural areas, including encouraging use of other effective CRC screening modalities (eg fecal occult blood testing) when colonoscopy is not possible, systems-based reminders that leverage electronic resources and are not visit-dependent, and public health education campaigns aimed specifically at women in rural communities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jennifer S. McCall-Hosenfeld
- Assistant Professor of Medicine and Public Health Sciences; Penn State College of Medicine; 600 Centerview Drive, A210; Hershey, PA 17033;
| | - Carol S. Weisman
- Distinguished Professor of Public Health Sciences and Obstetrics and Gynecology; Penn State College of Medicine; 600 Centerview Drive, A210; Hershey, PA 17033;
| | - Marianne M. Hillemeier
- Professor of Health Policy and Administration and Public Health Sciences; Penn State College of Medicine; 600 Centerview Drive, A210; Hershey, PA 17033;
| | - Amanda N. Perry
- Education Program Associate; Penn State College of Medicine; 600 Centerview Drive, A210; Hershey, PA 17033;
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Choi KC, Chan HY, Chan DN, Lam WW, Chan CW, Ho SS, Cheng KK, Goggins WB, Shiu AT, So WK. The mediating role of health professionals' recommendation in the uptake of colorectal cancer testing among older Chinese adults. Int J Nurs Pract 2013; 20:170-178. [PMID: 24118258 DOI: 10.1111/ijn.12118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the mediating effect of health professionals' recommendations on the relationship between the characteristics of older Chinese adults and the use of colorectal cancer testing. This was a cross-sectional population-based telephone survey. A total of 2004 Chinese adults aged 50 or above were recruited between 2 and 28 May 2007 to complete an anonymous telephone survey. The survey covered demographics, perceived health status and susceptibility to cancer, utilization of complementary medicine, family history of cancer, and cancer screening behaviour. The uptake of flexible sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy was 12%, of which only 3.4% had been recommended by health professionals. The effects of gender, a history of serious disease, perceptions related to health status and visiting doctor regularly on the flexible sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy uptake were mediated by a health professional's recommendation. A health professional's recommendation can be a catalyst for the decision of undergoing a colorectal cancer screening test in older adult people, in particular for those who are more health-conscious. As health professionals can play a crucial role in the development of successful population-based colorectal cancer screening program, efforts should be made to facilitate them in making recommendations for colorectal cancer screening to targeted high-risk group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kai-Chow Choi
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Helen Yl Chan
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Dorothy Ns Chan
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Wendy Wt Lam
- Department of Community Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Carmen Wh Chan
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Simone Sm Ho
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Karis Kf Cheng
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - William B Goggins
- School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Ann Ty Shiu
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| | - Winnie Kw So
- The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Schroy PC, Caron SE, Sherman BJ, Heeren TC, Battaglia TA. Risk assessment and clinical decision making for colorectal cancer screening. Health Expect 2013; 18:1327-38. [PMID: 23905546 DOI: 10.1111/hex.12110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/01/2013] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shared decision making (SDM) related to test preference has been advocated as a potentially effective strategy for increasing adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet primary care providers (PCPs) are often reluctant to comply with patient preferences if they differ from their own. Risk stratification advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) provides a rational strategy for reconciling these differences. OBJECTIVE To assess the importance of risk stratification in PCP decision making related to test preference for average-risk patients and receptivity to use of an electronic risk assessment tool for ACN to facilitate SDM. DESIGN Mixed methods, including qualitative key informant interviews and a cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS PCPs at an urban, academic safety-net institution. MAIN MEASURES Screening preferences, factors influencing patient recommendations and receptivity to use of a risk stratification tool. KEY RESULTS Nine PCPs participated in interviews and 57 completed the survey. Despite an overwhelming preference for colonoscopy by 95% of respondents, patient risk (67%) and patient preferences (63%) were more influential in their decision making than patient comorbidities (31%; P < 0.001). Age was the single most influential risk factor (excluding family history), with <20% of respondents choosing factors other than age. Most respondents reported that they would be likely to use a risk stratification tool in their practice either 'often' (43%) or sometimes (53%). CONCLUSIONS Risk stratification was perceived to be important in clinical decision making, yet few providers considered risk factors other than age for average-risk patients. Providers were receptive to the use of a risk assessment tool for ACN when recommending an appropriate screening test for select patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul C Schroy
- Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Sarah E Caron
- Women's Health Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Bonnie J Sherman
- Women's Health Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Timothy C Heeren
- Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Tracy A Battaglia
- Women's Health Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Malhotra A, Vaughan-Sarrazin M, Charlton ME, Rosenthal GE. Comparison of colorectal cancer screening in veterans based on the location of primary care clinic. J Prim Care Community Health 2013; 5:24-9. [PMID: 24327586 DOI: 10.1177/2150131913494842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare colorectal cancer screening rates in veterans receiving primary care (PC) in Veterans Administration (VA) community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs) and VA medical centers (VAMCs). METHODS The VA Outpatient Care Files were used to identify 2 837 770 patients ≥ 50 years with ≥ 2 PC visits in 2010. Veterans undergoing screening/surveillance colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, fecal-occult-blood testing (FOBT), and double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) were identified from ICD-9-CM/CPT codes. Patients were categorized as VAMC (n = 1 403 273; 49.5%) or CBOC (1 434 497; 50.5%) based on where majority of PC encounters occurred and as high risk (n = 284 090) or average risk (n = 2 553 680) based on colorectal cancer risk factors and validated ICD-9-CM-based algorithms. RESULTS CBOC patients were older than VAMC (mean ages 69.3 vs 67.4 years; P < .001), more likely (P < .001) to be male (96.5% vs 95.1%), and white (67.8% vs 64.2%), but less likely to be high-risk (9.4% vs 10.5%; P < .001). Rates of colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and DCBE were all lower in CBOC (P < .001). Among high-risk veterans, rates in CBOC and VAMC, respectively, were 27.4% versus 36.8% for colonoscopy, 1.3% versus 0.8% for sigmoidoscopy, and 0.8% versus 0.5% for DCBE. Among average-risk veterans, these rates were 1.3% versus 1.9%, 0.2% versus 0.1%, and 0.2% versus 0.1%, respectively. The differences remained after adjusting for age/comorbidity. The adjusted odds of colonoscopy for CBOC were 0.73 (95% confidence interval = 0.64-0.82) for average risk and 0.76 (95% confidence interval = 0.67-0.87) for high risk. In contrast, the use of FOBT was relatively similar in CBOCs and VAMCs among both high risk (11.1% vs 11.2%) and average risk (14.3% vs 14.1%). Screening rates were similar between those younger than 65 years and older than 65 years. CONCLUSIONS Veterans receiving PC in CBOCs are less likely to receive screening colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and DCBE than VAMC according to VA records. The lower use in CBOC was not offset by higher use of FOBT, including the degree to which CBOC patients may be more reliant to use non-VA services. The clinical appropriateness of these differences merits further examination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashish Malhotra
- Center for Comprehensive Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Smith RA, Brooks D, Cokkinides V, Saslow D, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2013: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines, current issues in cancer screening, and new guidance on cervical cancer screening and lung cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63:88-105. [PMID: 23378235 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 177] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Each year the American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its recommendations for early cancer detection, a report on data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, current ACS cancer screening guidelines are summarized, as are updated guidelines on cervical cancer screening and lung cancer screening with low-dose helical computed tomography. The latest data on the use of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey also are described, as are several issues related to screening coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert A Smith
- Cancer Control Science Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Waller J, Macedo A, von Wagner C, Simon AE, Jones C, Hammersley V, Weller D, Wardle J, Campbell C. Communication about colorectal cancer screening in Britain: public preferences for an expert recommendation. Br J Cancer 2012; 107:1938-43. [PMID: 23175148 PMCID: PMC3516693 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2012] [Revised: 10/08/2012] [Accepted: 10/22/2012] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Informed decision-making approaches to cancer screening emphasise the importance of decisions being determined by individuals' own values and preferences. However, advice from a trusted source may also contribute to autonomous decision-making. This study examined preferences regarding a recommendation from the NHS and information provision in the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS In face-to-face interviews, a population-based sample of adults across Britain (n=1964; age 50-80 years) indicated their preference between: (1) a strong recommendation to participate in CRC screening, (2) a recommendation alongside advice to make an individual decision, and (3) no recommendation but advice to make an individual decision. Other measures included trust in the NHS and preferences for information on benefits and risks. RESULTS Most respondents (84%) preferred a recommendation (47% strong recommendation, 37% recommendation plus individual decision-making advice), but the majority also wanted full information on risks (77%) and benefits (78%). Men were more in favour of a recommendation than women (86% vs 81%). Trust in the NHS was high overall, but the minority who expressed low trust were less likely to want a recommendation. CONCLUSION Most British adults want full information on risks and benefits of screening but they also want a recommendation from an authoritative source. An 'expert' view may be an important part of autonomous health decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Waller
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - A Macedo
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - C von Wagner
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - A E Simon
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
- School of Health Sciences, City University London, College Building, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK
| | - C Jones
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - V Hammersley
- Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Medical Quad, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK
| | - D Weller
- Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Medical Quad, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK
| | - J Wardle
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - C Campbell
- Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Medical Quad, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Meissner HI, Klabunde CN, Breen N, Zapka JM. Breast and colorectal cancer screening: U.S. primary care physicians' reports of barriers. Am J Prev Med 2012; 43:584-9. [PMID: 23159253 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.08.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2012] [Revised: 05/22/2012] [Accepted: 08/24/2012] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in performing and referring patients for cancer screening. Understanding barriers to test use is critical to developing strategies that promote adherence to clinical guidelines, but current literature does not distinguish the extent to which barriers may be similar or unique across screening modalities. PURPOSE To describe PCPs' self-reported perceptions of barriers to screening for breast and colorectal cancer (CRC) and compare the top three barriers associated with these screening modalities. METHODS Cross-sectional data analyzed in 2011 from a nationally representative survey of 2478 PCPs in the U.S. in 2006-2007. RESULTS PCPs reported greater barriers for CRC screening than for mammography. Lack of patient follow-through to complete recommended screening and the inability to pay for tests were the main barriers perceived by PCPs for both types of screening. Another major barrier cited was that patients do not perceive CRC as a threat. This was a lesser concern for the well-diffused message about the need for mammography. CONCLUSIONS This is the first national study to provide a comparison of physician-perceived barriers to breast and CRC screening. Study results suggest that efforts to improve use of cancer screening, and CRC screening in particular, will require interventions at physician, practice, and health-system levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen I Meissner
- Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892-2027, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Davis JL, Bynum SA, Katz RV, Buchanan K, Green BL. Sociodemographic differences in fears and mistrust contributing to unwillingness to participate in cancer screenings. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2012; 23:67-76. [PMID: 23124501 PMCID: PMC3786428 DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2012.0148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Effective provider-patient relationships are vital for positive patient health outcomes. This analysis assessed sociodemographic differences in fears and mistrust related to the provider-patient relationship, which may contribute to unwillingness to participate in cancer screenings (CSs). The data are from a stratified, random-digit dial telephone questionnaire of non-institutionalized households in New York, Maryland, and Puerto Rico. Statistically significant results indicate that Hispanics, compared with Whites, were nearly two times more likely to report that fear of being a "guinea pig" and lacking trust in medical people would make them unwilling to participate in CSs. Additionally, those with less education were over two times more likely to indicate a fear of being embarrassed during the screening would make them unwilling to participate in CSs. These results highlight areas where health professionals can improve interactions with their patients and be attentive to their fears and/or mistrusts to promote CSs utilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna L Davis
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior at Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Byers T. Implementation of the new American Cancer Society process for creating cancer screening guidelines. Cancer Cytopathol 2012; 120:287-90. [DOI: 10.1002/cncy.21198] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2011] [Revised: 02/20/2012] [Accepted: 02/21/2012] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
|
43
|
Katz ML, Broder-Oldach B, Fisher JL, King J, Eubanks K, Fleming K, Paskett ED. Patient-provider discussions about colorectal cancer screening: who initiates elements of informed decision making? J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27:1135-41. [PMID: 22476985 PMCID: PMC3514989 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-012-2045-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2011] [Revised: 03/08/2012] [Accepted: 03/12/2012] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain low among low-income minority populations. OBJECTIVE To evaluate informed decision making (IDM) elements about CRC screening among low-income minority patients. DESIGN Observational data were collected as part of a patient-level randomized controlled trial to improve CRC screening rates. Medical visits (November 2007 to May 2010) were audio-taped and coded for IDM elements about CRC screening. Near the end of the study one provider refused recording of patients' visits (33 of 270 patients). Among all patients in the trial, agreement to be audio taped was 43.5 % (103/237). Evaluable patient (n = 100) visits were assessed for CRC screening discussion occurrence, IDM elements, and who initiated discussion of each IDM element. PARTICIPANTS Patients were African American (72.2 %), female (63.7 %), with annual household incomes <$20,000 (60.7 %), without health insurance (57.0 %), and limited health literacy (53.7 %). KEY RESULTS Although CRC screening was mentioned during 48 (48 %) visits, no further discussion about screening occurred in 23 visits (19 times mentioned by the participant with no response from providers). During any visit, the maximum number of IDM elements was five; however, only two visits included five elements. The most common IDM element discussed in addition to the nature of the decision was the assessment of the patient's understanding in 16 (33.3 %) of the visits that included a CRC discussion. CONCLUSIONS A patient activation intervention initiated CRC screening discussions with health care providers; however, limited IDM occurred about CRC screening during medical visits of minority and low-income patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mira L Katz
- College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, College of Public Health, Columbus, OH 43201, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Zapka J, Klabunde CN, Taplin S, Yuan G, Ransohoff D, Kobrin S. Screening colonoscopy in the US: attitudes and practices of primary care physicians. J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27:1150-8. [PMID: 22539065 PMCID: PMC3514996 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-012-2051-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2011] [Revised: 02/14/2012] [Accepted: 03/09/2012] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Rising colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in the last decade are attributable almost entirely to increased colonoscopy use. Little is known about factors driving the increase, but primary care physicians (PCPs) play a central role in CRC screening delivery. OBJECTIVE Explore PCP attitudes toward screening colonoscopy and their associations with CRC screening practice patterns. DESIGN Cross-sectional analysis of data from a nationally representative survey conducted in 2006-2007. PARTICIPANTS 1,266 family physicians, general practitioners, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists. MAIN MEASURES Physician-reported changes in the volume of screening tests ordered, performed or supervised in the past 3 years, attitudes toward colonoscopy, the influence of evidence and perceived norms on their recommendations, challenges to screening, and practice characteristics. RESULTS The cooperation rate (excludes physicians without valid contact information) was 75%; 28% reported their volume of FOBT ordering had increased substantially or somewhat, and the majority (53%) reported their sigmoidoscopy volume decreased either substantially or somewhat. A majority (73%) reported that colonoscopy volume increased somewhat or substantially. The majority (86%) strongly agreed that colonoscopy was the best of the available CRC screening tests; 69% thought it was readily available for their patients; 59% strongly or somewhat agreed that they might be sued if they did not offer colonoscopy to their patients. All three attitudes were significantly related to substantial increases in colonoscopy ordering. CONCLUSIONS PCPs report greatly increased colonoscopy recommendation relative to other screening tests, and highly favorable attitudes about colonoscopy. Greater emphasis is needed on informed decision-making with patients about preferences for test options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane Zapka
- Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Zapka J, Taplin SH, Ganz P, Grunfeld E, Sterba K. Multilevel factors affecting quality: examples from the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2012; 2012:11-9. [PMID: 22623591 PMCID: PMC3482973 DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
The complex environmental context must be considered as we move forward to improve cancer care and, ultimately, patient and population outcomes. The cancer care continuum represents several care types, each of which includes multiple technical and communication steps and interfaces among patients, providers, and organizations. We use two case scenarios to 1) illustrate the variability, diversity, and interaction of factors from multiple levels that affect care quality and 2) discuss research implications and provide hypothetical examples of multilevel interventions. Each scenario includes a targeted literature review to illustrate contextual influences upon care and sets the stage for theory-informed interventions. The screening case highlights access issues in older women, and the survivorship case illustrates the multiple transition challenges faced by patients, families, and organizations. Example interventions show the potential gains of implementing intervention strategies that work synergistically at multiple levels. While research examining multilevel intervention is a priority, it presents numerous study design, measurement, and analytic challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane Zapka
- Department of Medicine, Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Rm 302H, 135 Cannon St, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Katz ML, Fisher JL, Fleming K, Paskett ED. Patient activation increases colorectal cancer screening rates: a randomized trial among low-income minority patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 21:45-52. [PMID: 22068288 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-0815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain low among low-income and minority populations. The purpose of this study was to determine whether providing patients with screening information, activating them to ask for a screening test, and telephone barriers counseling improves CRC screening rates compared with providing screening information only. METHODS Patients were randomized to CRC screening information plus patient activation and barriers counseling (n = 138) or CRC screening information (n = 132). Barriers counseling was attempted among activated patients if screening was not completed after one month. CRC screening test completion was determined by medical record review at two months after the medical visit. Logistic regression was used to determine whether activated patients were more likely to complete CRC screening, after adjustment for confounding factors (e.g., demographic characteristics and CRC knowledge). RESULTS Patients were African American (72.2%), female (63.7%), had annual household incomes less than $20,000 (60.7%), no health insurance (57.0%), and limited health literacy skills (53.7%). In adjusted analyses, more patients randomized to the activation group completed a screening test (19.6% vs. 9.9%; OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.14-5.56; P = 0.020). In addition, more activated patients reported discussing screening with their provider (54.4% vs. 27.5%, OR = 3.29, 95% CI: 1.95-5.56; P < 0.001) and had more screening tests ordered (39.1% vs. 17.6%; OR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.88-6.15; P < 0.001) compared with those in the control group. CONCLUSION Patient activation increased CRC screening rates among low-income minority patients. IMPACT Innovative strategies are still needed to increase CRC screening discussions, motivate providers to recommend screening to patients, as well as assist patients to complete ordered screening tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mira L Katz
- College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43201, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Calderwood AH, Wasan SK, Heeren TC, Schroy PC. Patient and Provider Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: How Does CT Colonography Compare to Other Modalities? INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION 2011; 4:307-338. [PMID: 25237287 PMCID: PMC4165440] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patient and provider preferences toward CT colonography (CTC) remain unclear. The primary goals of this study were 1) to investigate patient preferences for one of the currently recommended CRC screening modalities and 2) to evaluate provider preferences before and after review of updated guidelines. METHODS Cross-sectional survey of ambulatory-care patients and providers in the primary care setting. Providers were surveyed before and after reviewing the 2008 guidelines by the American Cancer Society, US Multisociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American College of Radiology. RESULTS Of 100 patients surveyed, 59% preferred colonoscopy, 17% fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), 14% stool DNA (sDNA) testing, and 10% CTC (P <0.001). The majority of those whose first choice was a stool-based test chose the alternate stool-based test as their second choice over CTC or colonoscopy (P<0.0001). Patients who preferred colonoscopy chose accuracy (76%) and frequency of testing (10%) as the most important test features, whereas patients who preferred a stool-based test chose discomfort (52%) and complications (23%). Of 170 providers surveyed, 96% chose colonoscopy, 2% FOBT, and 1% FOBT with flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) (p < 0.0001). No providers chose CTC or sDNA as their preferred option before reviewing guidelines, and 89% kept their preference after review of guidelines. As a default option for patients who declined colonoscopy, 44% of providers chose FOBT, 12% FOBT+FS, 4% CTC, and 37% deferred to patient preference before review of guidelines. Of the 33% of providers who changed their preference after review of guidelines, 46% recommended CTC. Accuracy was the most influential reason for provider test choice. CONCLUSIONS Patients and providers prefer colonoscopy for CRC screening. Revised guidelines endorsing the use of CTC are unlikely to change provider preferences but may influence choice of default strategies for patients who decline colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Audrey H. Calderwood
- Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Boston, MA
| | - Sharmeel K. Wasan
- Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Boston, MA
| | - Timothy C. Heeren
- Boston University School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Boston, MA
| | - Paul C. Schroy
- Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|