OBJECTIVE: Implementation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with widely available techniques can result in a significant reduction in CRC-related mortality. Clinical practice paradigms are often ingrained in physicians during residency. We, therefore, investigated both compliance and perceived obstacles to CRC screening in the practices of physicians-in-training. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical records of patients who were receiving their primary care in the internal medicine resident clinics at the University of Nebraska Medical Center and were at average risk for CRC. In addition to demographics, data on the use of screening mammography, Pap smear, cholesterol, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) were collected. A questionnaire was also distributed to all internal medicine residents to assess their CRC screening knowledge and perceived screening compliance. RESULTS: One hundred eight patient charts were reviewed. The percentage of patients appropriately screened for each test was as follows: mammography 66%, Pap smear 65%, cholesterol 53%, FOBT 13%, and FS 16%. Residents dramatically overestimated their perceived FS and FOBT screening rates, 78% and 88%, respectively. Most residents identified barriers to FS screening. Although rudimentary CRC screening knowledge appeared adequate, a number of knowledge-based deficiencies were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine residents at our institution demonstrate poor CRC screening compliance especially when compared with other health care maintenance interventions. This cannot be entirely accounted for by inadequate knowledge; discrepancy between the perceived and actual implementation of CRC screening may be important. Efforts to improve screening compliance should include a focus on physicians-in-training.
OBJECTIVE: Implementation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with widely available techniques can result in a significant reduction in CRC-related mortality. Clinical practice paradigms are often ingrained in physicians during residency. We, therefore, investigated both compliance and perceived obstacles to CRC screening in the practices of physicians-in-training. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical records of patients who were receiving their primary care in the internal medicine resident clinics at the University of Nebraska Medical Center and were at average risk for CRC. In addition to demographics, data on the use of screening mammography, Pap smear, cholesterol, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) were collected. A questionnaire was also distributed to all internal medicine residents to assess their CRC screening knowledge and perceived screening compliance. RESULTS: One hundred eight patient charts were reviewed. The percentage of patients appropriately screened for each test was as follows: mammography 66%, Pap smear 65%, cholesterol 53%, FOBT 13%, and FS 16%. Residents dramatically overestimated their perceived FS and FOBT screening rates, 78% and 88%, respectively. Most residents identified barriers to FS screening. Although rudimentary CRC screening knowledge appeared adequate, a number of knowledge-based deficiencies were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine residents at our institution demonstrate poor CRC screening compliance especially when compared with other health care maintenance interventions. This cannot be entirely accounted for by inadequate knowledge; discrepancy between the perceived and actual implementation of CRC screening may be important. Efforts to improve screening compliance should include a focus on physicians-in-training.
Authors: Maida J Sewitch; Pascal Burtin; Martin Dawes; Mark Yaffe; Linda Snell; Mark Roper; Patrizia Zanelli; Alan Pavilanis Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.522
Authors: Judith L Bowen; Stephen M Salerno; John K Chamberlain; Elizabeth Eckstrom; Helen L Chen; Suzanne Brandenburg Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Cynthia Villarreal-Garza; Luis García-Aceituno; Antonio R Villa; Miguel Perfecto-Arroyo; Miriam Rojas-Flores; Eucario León-Rodríguez Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Athanasios D Sioulas; Stylianos Kalimeris; Persephone Papatheodosiou; Ioannis Karabinis; Olga Agelopoulou; Iosif Beintaris; Dimitrios Polymeros; George Dimitriadis; Konstantinos Triantafyllou Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-11-16
Authors: Kevin Fiscella; Amanat Yosha; Samantha K Hendren; Sharon Humiston; Paul Winters; Pat Ford; Starlene Loader; Raymond Specht; Shirley Pope; Amna Adris; Steven Marcus Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-09-23 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Margaret Boehler; Vriti Advani; Cathy J Schwind; Elizabeth Dawn Wietfeldt; Yolanda Becker; Barbara Lewis; Jan Rakinic; Imran Hassan Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Amy S Oxentenko; Nisheeth K Goel; Darrell S Pardi; Robert A Vierkant; Wesley O Petersen; Joseph C Kolars; Robert T Flinchbaugh; Timothy O Wilson; Katherine Sharpe; John H Bond; Robert A Smith; Bernard Levin; J Bart Pope; Paul C Schroy; Paul J Limburg Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2007 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Carmen E Guerra; J Sanford Schwartz; Katrina Armstrong; Jamin S Brown; Chanita Hughes Halbert; Judy A Shea Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-10-16 Impact factor: 5.128