Eliciting vulnerable patients' preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review

Assessing the job preferences of senior medical students for mandatory service: a discrete choice experiment

AIM

To investigate the job preferences of senior medical students for mandatory service as general practitioners using discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION

Health workforce is directly associated with health service coverage and health outcomes. However, there is a global shortage of healthcare workers (HCWs) in rural areas. Discrete choice experiments can guide the policy and decision-makers to increase recruitment and retention of HCWs in remote and rural areas by determining their job preferences. The aim of this study is to investigate job preferences of senior medical students for mandatory service as general practitioners.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was conducted among 144 medical students. To estimate students' preferences for different levels of job attributes, a mixed logit model was utilised. Simulations of job uptake rates and willingness to pay (WTP) estimates were computed.

FINDINGS

All attributes had an impact on the job preferences of students with the following order of priority: salary, workload, proximity to family/friends, working environment, facility and developmental status. For a normal workload and a workplace closed to family/friends which were the most valued attributes after salary, WTPs were 2818.8 Turkish lira (TRY) ($398.7) and 2287.5 TRY ($323.6), respectively. The preference weights of various job characteristics were modified by gender, the presence of a HCW parent and willingness to perform mandatory service. To recruit young physicians where they are most needed, monetary incentives appear to be the most efficient intervention. Non-pecuniary job characteristics also affected job preferences. Packages of both monetary and non-monetary incentives tailored to individual characteristics would be the most efficient approach.

Sociodemographic Factors and Screening CT Colonography Use Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND. Approximately one-third of the eligible U.S. population have not undergone guideline-compliant colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Guidelines recognize various screening strategies to increase adherence. CMS provides coverage for all recommended screening tests except CT colonography (CTC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare CTC and other CRC screening tests in terms of associations of utilization with income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. METHODS. This retrospective study used CMS Research Identifiable Files from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2020. These files contain claims information for 5% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Data were extracted for individuals 45-85 years old, and individuals with high CRC risk were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to determine the likelihood of undergoing CRC screening tests (as well as of undergoing diagnostic CTC, a CMS-covered test with similar physical access as screening CTC) as a function of income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity while controlling for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, U.S. census region, screening year, and related conditions and procedures. RESULTS. For 12,273,363 beneficiary years (mean age, 70.5 ± 8.2 [SD] years; 2,436,849 unique beneficiaries: 6,774,837 female beneficiaries, 5,498,526 male beneficiaries), there were 785,103 CRC screenings events, including 645 for screening CTC. Compared with individuals living in communities with per capita income of less than US$25,000, individuals in communities with income of US$100,000 or more had OR for undergoing screening CTC of 5.73, optical colonoscopy (OC) of 1.36, sigmoidoscopy of 1.03, guaiac fecal occult blood test or fecal immunochemical test of 1.50, stool DNA of 1.43, and diagnostic CTC of 2.00. The OR for undergoing screening CTC was 1.00 for Hispanic individuals and 1.08 for non-Hispanic Black individuals compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Compared with the OR for undergoing screening CTC for residents of metropolitan areas, the OR was 0.51 for residents of micropolitan areas and 0.65 for residents of small or rural areas. CONCLUSION. The association with income was substantially larger for screening CTC than for other CRC screening tests or for diagnostic CTC. CLINICAL IMPACT. Medicare's noncoverage for screening CTC may contribute to lower adherence with CRC screening guidelines for lower-income beneficiaries. Medicare coverage of CTC could reduce income-based disparities for individuals avoiding OC owing to invasiveness, need for anesthesia, or complication risk.

Trends in colorectal cancer screening in the United States, 2012 to 2020

OBJECTIVES

Despite recommendations to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, trends in CRC screening vary with sociodemographic status. We aimed to evaluate trends in CRC screening in the US population and subpopulations.

METHODS

A total of 1,082,924 participants aged 50 to 75 from five cycles (2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020) of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were involved. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate linear trends in CRC screening utilization from 2012 to 2018. Rao-Scott chi-square tests were used to assess the differences in CRC screening utilization between 2018 and 2020.

RESULTS

The estimated percentage reporting up-to-date with CRC screening increased significantly (P for trend <0.001), from 62.8% (95% CI, 62.4%-63.2%) in 2012 to 66.7% (95% CI, 66.3%-67.2%) in 2018 and 70.4% (95% CI, 69.8%-71.0%) in 2020, in accordance with 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. Trends followed similar patterns in most subgroups, although with different magnitudes in several subgroups, primarily those underweight showed a stable percentage over time (P for trend  =  0.170). In 2020, 72.4% of participants reported they were up to date with CRC screening, including the utilization of stool DNA tests and virtual colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was the most commonly used test in 2020 (64.5%), followed by FOBT (12.6%), stool DNA test (5.8%), sigmoidoscopy (3.8%), and virtual colonoscopy (2.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationally representative survey of the US population from 2012 through 2020, the percentage reporting up to date with CRC screening has increased, but not equally among all subgroups.

Is there a place for sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening? A systematic review and critical appraisal of cost-effectiveness models

INTRODUCTION

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing both incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy and stool tests are most frequently used for this purpose. Sigmoidoscopy is an alternative screening measure with a strong evidence base. Due to its distinct characteristics, it might be preferred by subgroups. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the cost-effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening compared to other screening methods and to identify influencing parameters.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for the time frame 01/2010-01/2023 was conducted using the databases MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit, Web of Science, NHS EED, as well as the Cost-Effectiveness Registry. Full economic analyses examining sigmoidoscopy as a screening measure for the general population at average risk for CRC were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. All included studies were critically assessed based on a questionnaire for modelling studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies are included in the review. Compared to no screening, sigmoidoscopy is a cost-effective screening strategy for CRC. When modelled as a single measure strategy, sigmoidoscopy is mostly dominated by colonoscopy or modern stool tests. When combined with annual stool testing, sigmoidoscopy in 5-year intervals is more effective and less costly than the respective strategies alone. The results of the studies are influenced by varying assumptions on adherence, costs, and test characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The combination of sigmoidoscopy and stool testing represents a cost-effective screening strategy that has not received much attention in current guidelines. Further research is needed that goes beyond a narrow focus on screening technology and models different, preference-based participation behavior in subgroups.

Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Systematic reviews of discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) are being increasingly conducted. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and describe the methodologies that have been used to summarize results across DCEs.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to March 18, 2021, to identify English-language systematic reviews of patient preferences that included at least two DCEs and extracted data on attribute importance. The methods used to summarize results across DCEs were classified into narrative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative (meta-analytic) approaches and compared. Approaches to characterize the extent of preference heterogeneity were also described.

RESULTS

From 7362 unique records, we identified 54 eligible reviews from 2010 to Mar 2021, across a broad range of health conditions. Most (83%) used a narrative approach to summarize findings of DCEs, often citing differences in studies as the reason for not formally pooling findings. Semi-quantitative approaches included summarizing the frequency of the most important attributes, the frequency of attribute statistical significance, or tabulated comparisons of attribute importance for each pair of attributes. One review conducted a meta-analysis using the maximum acceptable risk. While reviews often commented on the heterogeneity of patient preferences, few (6%) addressed this systematically across studies.

CONCLUSION

While not commonly used, several semi-quantitative and one quantitative approach for synthesizing results of DCEs were identified, which may be useful for generating summary estimates across DCEs when appropriate. Further work is needed to assess the validity and usefulness of these approaches.

Disparities in Recommendations for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Average-Risk Individuals: An Ecobiosocial Approach

Regardless of the high global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC), the uptake of CRC screening varies across countries. This systematic review aimed to provide a picture of the disparities in recommendations for CRC screening in average-risk individuals using an ecobiosocial approach. It was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search was conducted through Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and EBSCOHost. Full-text guidelines which were published between 2011 and 2021, along with guidelines which provided recommendations on CRC screening in average-risk individuals, were included in the review. However, guidelines focusing only on a single screening modality were excluded. Fourteen guidelines fulfilling the eligibility criteria were retained for the final review and analysis. Quality assessment of each guideline was performed using the AGREE II instrument. Disparities in guidelines identified in this review were classified into ecological (screening modalities and strategies), biological (recommended age, gender and ethnicities), and social (smoking history, socioeconomic status, and behavior) factors. In general, unstandardized practices in CRC screening for average-risk individuals are likely attributable to the inconsistent and non-specific recommendations in the literature. This review calls on stakeholders and policymakers to review the existing colorectal cancer screening practices and pursue standardization.

Colorectal cancer disparities across the continuum of cancer care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Disparate colorectal cancer outcomes persist in vulnerable populations. We aimed to examine the distribution of research across the colorectal cancer care continuum, and to determine disparities in the utilization of Surgery among Black patients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of colorectal cancer disparities studies was performed. The meta-analysis assessed three utilization measures in Surgery.

RESULTS

Of 1,199 publications, 60% focused on Prevention, Screening, or Diagnosis, 20% on Survivorship, 15% on Treatment, and 1% on End-of-Life Care. A total of 16 studies, including 1,110,674 patients, were applied to three meta-analyses regarding utilization of Surgery. Black patients were less likely to receive surgery, twice as likely to refuse surgery, and less likely to receive laparoscopic surgery, when compared to White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 2011, the majority of research focused on prevention, screening, or diagnosis. Given the observed treatment disparities among Black patients, future efforts to reduce colorectal cancer disparities should include interventions within Surgery.

Additional offer of sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening in Germany: rationale and protocol of the decision-analytic modelling approach in the SIGMO study

INTRODUCTION

In Germany, statutory insured persons are entitled to a stool test (faecal immunochemical test (FIT)) or colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, depending on age and sex, yet participation rates are rather low. Sigmoidoscopy is a currently not available screening measure that has a strong evidence base for incidence and mortality reduction. Due to its distinct characteristics, it might be preferred by some, who now reject colonoscopy. The objective of this study is to estimate the economic consequences of the additional offer of sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening in Germany compared with the present screening practice while considering the preferences of the general population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A decision-analytic modelling approach will be developed that compares the present CRC screening programme in Germany (FIT, colonoscopy) with a programme extended by sigmoidoscopy from a societal perspective. A decision tree and Markov model will be combined to assess both short-term and long-term effects, such as CRC and adenoma detection rates, the number of CRC cases, CRC mortality as well as complications. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained for each alternative will be calculated. The model will incorporate the general population's preferences based on a discrete choice experiment. Further, input parameters will be taken from the literature, the German cancer registry and health insurance claims data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Hannover Medical School (ID: 8671_BO_K_2019). The findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and/or international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00019010.

Centralized colorectal cancer screening outreach and patient navigation for vulnerable populations in North Carolina: study protocol for the SCORE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective in reducing CRC mortality, screening rates in vulnerable populations served by community health centers (CHCs) remain below national targets. CHCs in North Carolina are challenged to reach CRC screening targets as they tend to be under-resourced, have limited capacity to implement and sustain population health interventions, and typically operate independently from one another and from regional colonoscopy providers. The Scaling Colorectal Cancer Screening Through Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (SCORE) project is designed to address barriers to CRC screening in partnership with CHCs by implementing a multilevel intervention that includes centralized support infrastructure for mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach and patient navigation to follow-up colonoscopy. This paper describes protocols for the SCORE implementation trial.

METHODS

We will conduct a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial that will assess effectiveness at increasing CRC screening and follow-up rates while also assessing implementation outcomes. The planned trial sample will include 4000 CHC patients who are at average CRC risk and due for screening. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either usual care or a multilevel intervention that includes mailed FIT outreach and patient navigation support to follow-up colonoscopy for those with abnormal FIT. The primary effectiveness outcome is completion of any CRC screening test at six months after randomization. We will also conduct a multilevel assessment of implementation outcomes and determinants.

DISCUSSION

This hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial will evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an intervention that provides centralized infrastructure for mailed FIT screening and patient navigation for CHCs that operate independently of other healthcare facilities. Findings from this research will enhance understanding of the effectiveness of a centralized approach and factors that determine successful implementation in vulnerable patient populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on May 28, 2020, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04406714).

Evaluating preferences for colorectal cancer screening in individuals under age 50 using the Analytic Hierarchy Process

BACKGROUND

In 2021, the United States Preventive Services Task Force updated their recommendation, stating that individuals ages 45-49 should initiate screening for colorectal cancer. Since several screening strategies are recommended, making a shared decision involves including an individual's preferences. Few studies have included individuals under age 50. In this study, we use a multicriteria decision analysis technique called the Analytic Hierarchy Process to explore preferences for screening strategies and evaluate whether preferences vary by age.

METHODS

Participants evaluated a hierarchy with 3 decision alternatives (colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, and computed tomography colonography), 3 criteria (test effectiveness, the screening plan, and features of the test) and 7 sub-criteria. We used the linear fit method to calculate consistency ratios and the eigenvector method for group preferences. We conducted sensitivity analysis to assess whether results are robust to change and tested differences in preferences by participant variables using chi-square and analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Of the 579 individuals surveyed, 556 (96%) provided complete responses to the AHP portion of the survey. Of these, 247 participants gave responses consistent enough (CR < 0.18) to be included in the final analysis. Participants that were either white or have lower health literacy were more likely to be excluded due to inconsistency. Colonoscopy was the preferred strategy in those < 50 and fecal immunochemical test was preferred by those over age 50 (p = 0.002). These results were consistent when we restricted analysis to individuals ages 45-55 (p = 0.011). Participants rated test effectiveness as the most important criteria for making their decision (weight = 0.555). Sensitivity analysis showed our results were robust to shifts in criteria and sub-criteria weights.

CONCLUSIONS

We reveal potential differences in preferences for screening strategies by age that could influence the adoption of screening programs to include individuals under age 50. Researchers and practitioners should consider at-home interventions using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to assist with the formulation of preferences that are key to shared decision-making. The costs associated with different preferences for screening strategies should be explored further if limited resources must be allocated to screen individuals ages 45-49.

Bias Issues in Colorectal Cancer Management: A Review

Based on census data, over one-third of the US population identifies as a racial or ethnic minority. This group of racial and ethnic minorities is more likely to develop cancer and die from it when compared with the general population of the USA. These disparities are most pronounced in the African American community. Despite overall CRC rates decreasing nationally and within certain racial and ethnic minorities in the USA, there continue to be disparities in incidence and mortality when compared with non-Hispanic Whites. The disparities in CRC incidence and mortality are related to systematic racism and bias inherent in healthcare systems and society. Disparities in CRC management will continue to exist until specific interventions are implemented in the context of each racial and ethnic group. This review's primary aim is to highlight the disparities in CRC among African Americans in the USA. For surgeons, understanding these disparities is formative to creating change and improving the quality of care, centering equity for all patients.

Evaluation of Blood Stool Test Utilization for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Georgia, USA

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most prevalent cancer and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States (USA). Early screening has been demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes for CRC. Assessing patterns in CRC screening utilization is important for guiding policy and implementing programs for CRC prevention and control. This study examines the trends and sociodemographic factors associated with blood stool test utilization (BSTU) for CRC screening in Georgia, USA. The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data were analyzed for Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) in BSTU between 1997 and 2014 among adults aged 50+ who have had a blood stool test within the past two years, and logistic regression analysis of the 2016 data was performed to identify the associated sociodemographic factors. In Georgia, an overall decrease was observed in BSTU, from 27.8% in 1997 to 16.1% in 2014 (AAPC = -2.6, p = 0.023). The decrease in BSTU was less pronounced in Georgia than nationally (from 26.1% in 1997 to 12.8% in 2014 (AAPC = -4.5, p < 0.001)). BSTU was significantly associated with black race/ethnicity (Black vs. White (aOR = 1.43, p = 0.015)), older age (≥70 vs. 50-59 (aOR = 1.62, p = 0.006)), having insurance coverage (no vs. yes (aOR = 0.37 p = 0.005)), and lower income (≥USD 50,000 vs. Collapse

Key Words

• FOBT
• Georgia
• USA
• blood stool test
• colorectal cancer
• screening

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Benjamin E. Ansa Institute of Public and Preventive Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA; (B.D.); (J.A.J.)
Nicollette Lewis Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA;
Zachary Hoffman Department of Psychology, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA; Transitions of Augusta, Augusta, GA 30912, USA
Biplab Datta Institute of Public and Preventive Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA; (B.D.); (J.A.J.)
J. Aaron Johnson Institute of Public and Preventive Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA; (B.D.); (J.A.J.)

Collapse

Motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice after a positive colorectal cancer screening test result: a qualitative study

SETTING

Participants with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) have a high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. They are therefore recommended follow-up by colonoscopy. However, more than ten percent of positively screened persons do not adhere to this advice.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate FIT-positive individuals' motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice in the Dutch CRC screening program.

SUBJECTS

Non-adherent FIT-positive participants of the Dutch CRC screening program.

DESIGN

We conducted semi structured in-depth interviews with 17 persons who did not undergo colonoscopy within 6 months after a positive FIT. Interviews were undertaken face-to-face and data were analysed thematically with open coding and constant comparison.

RESULTS

All participants had multifactorial motives for non-adherence. A preference for more personalised care was described with the following themes: aversion against the design of the screening program, expectations of personalised care, emotions associated with experiences of impersonal care and a desire for counselling where options other than colonoscopy could be discussed. Furthermore, intrinsic motives were: having a perception of low risk for CRC (described by all participants), aversion and fear of colonoscopy, distrust, reluctant attitude to the treatment of cancer and cancer fatalism. Extrinsic motives were: having other health issues or priorities, practical barriers, advice from a general practitioner (GP) and financial reasons.

CONCLUSION

Personalised screening counselling might have helped to improve the interviewees' experiences with the screening program as well as their knowledge on CRC and CRC screening. Future studies should explore whether personalised screening counselling also has potential to increase adherence rates. Key points Participants with a positive FIT in two-step colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are at high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. Non-adherence after an unfavourable screening result happens in all CRC programs worldwide with the consequence that many of the participants do not undergo colonoscopy for the definitive assessment of the presence of colorectal cancer. Little qualitative research has been done to study the reasons why individuals participate in the first step of the screening but not in the second step. We found a preference for more personalised care, which was not reported in previous literature on this subject. Furthermore, intrinsic factors, such as a low risk perception and distrust, and extrinsic factors, such as the presence of other health issues and GP advice, may also play a role in non-adherence. A person-centred approach in the form of a screening counselling session may be beneficial for this group of CRC screening participants.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)-based interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening in the Medicaid population

BACKGROUND

Mailed reminders to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) have been shown to be effective in the Medicaid population, in which screening is underused. However, little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of these interventions, with or without an included FIT kit.

METHODS

The authors conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial that compared the effectiveness of a reminder + FIT intervention versus a reminder-only intervention in increasing FIT screening. The analysis compared the costs per person screened for CRC screening associated with the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative using a 1-year time horizon. Input data for a cohort of 35,000 unscreened North Carolina Medicaid enrollees ages 52 to 64 years were derived from the trial and microcosting. Inputs and outputs were estimated from 2 perspectives-the Medicaid/state perspective and the health clinic/facility perspective-using probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate uncertainty.

RESULTS

The anticipated number of CRC screenings, including both FIT and screening colonoscopies, was higher for the reminder + FIT alternative (n = 8131; 23.2%) than for the reminder-only alternative (n = 5533; 15.8%). From the Medicaid/state perspective, the reminder + FIT alternative dominated the reminder-only alternative, with lower costs and higher screening rates. From the health clinic/facility perspective, the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $116 per person screened.

CONCLUSIONS

The reminder + FIT alternative was cost saving per additional Medicaid enrollee screened compared with the reminder-only alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective and likely cost-effective from the health clinic/facility perspective. The results also demonstrate that health departments and state Medicaid programs can efficiently mail FIT kits to large numbers of Medicaid enrollees to increase CRC screening completion.