McQueen A, Bartholomew LK, Greisinger AJ, Medina GG, Hawley ST, Haidet P, Bettencourt JL, Shokar NK, Ling BS, Vernon SW. Behind closed doors: physician-patient discussions about colorectal cancer screening.
J Gen Intern Med 2009;
24:1228-35. [PMID:
19763699 PMCID:
PMC2771240 DOI:
10.1007/s11606-009-1108-4]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2009] [Revised: 08/03/2009] [Accepted: 08/21/2009] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Despite the availability of multiple effective screening tests for colorectal cancer, screening rates remain suboptimal. The literature documents patient preferences for different test types and recommends a shared decision-making approach for physician-patient colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) discussions, but it is unknown whether such communication about CRCS preferences and options actually occurs in busy primary-care settings.
OBJECTIVE
Describe physician-patient CRCS discussions during a wellness visit.
DESIGN
Cross-sectional; patients audio-recorded with physicians.
PARTICIPANTS
A subset of patients (N = 64) participating in a behavioral intervention trial designed to increase CRCS who completed a wellness visit during the trial with a participating physician (N = 8).
APPROACH
Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative methods.
RESULTS
Physicians in this sample consistently recommended CRCS, but focused on colonoscopy. Physicians did not offer a fecal occult blood test alone as a screening choice, which may have created missed opportunities for some patients to get screened. In this single visit, physicians' communication processes generally precluded discussion of patients' test preferences and did not facilitate shared decision-making. Patients' questions indicated their interest in different CRCS test types and appeared to elicit more information from physicians. Some patients remained resistant to CRCS after discussing it with a physician.
CONCLUSION
If a preference for colonoscopy is widespread among primary-care physicians, the implications for intervention are either to prepare patients for this preference or to train physicians to offer options when recommending screening to patients.
Collapse