Literature DB >> 15132463

Current awareness in Canada of clinical practice guidelines for colorectal cancer screening.

Tracey K Asano1, Daniel Toma, Hartley S Stern, Robin S McLeod.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTF-PHC) recently revised its screening recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC). We wished to assess the effect of this change on the screening beliefs and clinical practice of primary care physicians.
METHODS: We surveyed 160 primary-care physicians, quasi-randomly sampled, in June-July 2001 and again in April-July 2002, 9 months after publication of the guidelines. Descriptive statistics and McNemar chi2 analyses were carried out on data from physicians who responded to both surveys.
RESULTS: Of the those sampled, 47% responded to both surveys. After the publication of the CTF-PHC guidelines, the proportion reporting that they recommend CRC screening to their patients at average risk increased from 43% to 60% (p = 0.02). Before publication of the revised guidelines 48% stated that the CTF-PHC did not support screening, compared with 24% afterward (p = 0.01). CTF-PHC guidelines were acknowledged by 30% to be a source of CRC screening information. Around 9 months post-publication, 24% of the physicians stated their awareness of the revised screening guidelines. The most commonly cited reasons for not recommending CRC screening to average-risk patients were that the evidence is inconclusive and that CTF-PHC guidelines do not support screening.
CONCLUSIONS: After publication of the revised CTF-PHC guidelines more primary-care physicians reported that they recommend CRC screening to their average-risk patients. The belief that the evidence is inconclusive nevertheless remains a considerable barrier to implementation. To increase the use of screening for CRC, additional strategies are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15132463      PMCID: PMC3211917     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Surg        ISSN: 0008-428X            Impact factor:   2.089


  17 in total

Review 1.  Translating guidelines into practice. A systematic review of theoretic concepts, practical experience and research evidence in the adoption of clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  D A Davis; A Taylor-Vaisey
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-08-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Provision of preventive care to unannounced standardized patients.

Authors:  B Hutchison; C A Woodward; G R Norman; J Abelson; J A Brown
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-01-27       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Practice guidelines for clinical prevention: do patients, physicians and experts share common ground?

Authors:  M D Beaulieu; E Hudon; D Roberge; R Pineault; D Forté; J Légaré
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-09-07       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-11-30       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test.

Authors:  O Kronborg; C Fenger; J Olsen; O D Jørgensen; O Søndergaard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-11-30       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality.

Authors:  P A Newcomb; R G Norfleet; B E Storer; T S Surawicz; P M Marcus
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1992-10-21       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study.

Authors:  J S Mandel; J H Bond; T R Church; D C Snover; G M Bradley; L M Schuman; F Ederer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-05-13       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Cancer screening by primary care physicians: a comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit.

Authors:  D E Montaño; W R Phillips
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Periodic health examination, 1994 update: 2. Screening strategies for colorectal cancer. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination.

Authors:  M J Solomon; R S McLeod
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1994-06-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Clinical practice guidelines. New-to-practice family physicians' attitudes.

Authors:  B M Ferrier; C A Woodward; M Cohen; A P Williams
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.275

View more
  5 in total

1.  Current Status and Future Prospects of Clinical Psychology: Toward a Scientifically Principled Approach to Mental and Behavioral Health Care.

Authors:  Timothy B Baker; Richard M McFall; Varda Shoham
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2008-11-01

2.  Colorectal cancer screening: physicians' knowledge of risk assessment and guidelines, practice, and description of barriers and facilitators.

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

3.  Resource implications for a population-based colorectal cancer screening program in Canada: a study of the impact on colonoscopy capacity and costs in London, Ontario.

Authors:  Agatha Lau; James C Gregor
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.522

4.  The relationship between medical students' knowledge, confidence, experience, and skills related to colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Karen E Hauer; Luann Wilkerson; Arianne Teherani
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.037

5.  How much diagnostic safety can we afford, and how should we decide? A health economics perspective.

Authors:  David E Newman-Toker; Kathryn M McDonald; David O Meltzer
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 7.035

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.