Literature DB >> 15456665

Colon cancer risk counseling by health-care providers: perceived barriers and response to an internet-based cancer risk appraisal instrument.

Kathleen M Fairfield1, Wendy Y Chen, Graham A Colditz, Karen M Emmons, Suzanne W Fletcher.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Risk appraisal instruments may be helpful in reinforcing prevention messages, although little is known about physician acceptance of such instruments.
OBJECTIVE: We explored perceived barriers to colon cancer risk counseling and responses to the colon cancer component of an Internet-based risk appraisal instrument.
METHODS: We qualitatively assessed provider perceptions of barriers to colon cancer prevention and screening, and their responses to the Harvard Cancer Risk Index using focus groups of primary care providers.
RESULTS: Many providers commented that the risk appraisal instrument may be most helpful to reinforce messages by a health-care provider. The tool may increase awareness about modifiable risk factors for cancer and help patients prioritize changes as well as improve screening acceptance. With regard to barriers to counseling patients about colon cancer prevention and screening, providers expressed concerns that behaviors are too difficult to change. In addition, they were frustrated by limited time for prevention counseling and poor reimbursement.
CONCLUSIONS: The Internet-based risk index was well accepted, although providers thought it would be most effective when used to complement provider messages about prevention. Use of an Internet-based risk index along with physician counseling could help improve cancer prevention practices and cancer screening acceptance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15456665     DOI: 10.1207/s15430154jce1902_9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Educ        ISSN: 0885-8195            Impact factor:   2.037


  7 in total

1.  Issues in the design of Internet-based systems for collecting patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  James B Jones; Claire F Snyder; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Risk assessment and clinical decision making for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Paul C Schroy; Sarah E Caron; Bonnie J Sherman; Timothy C Heeren; Tracy A Battaglia
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Cancer and communication in the health care setting: experiences of older Vietnamese immigrants, a qualitative study.

Authors:  Giang T Nguyen; Frances K Barg; Katrina Armstrong; John H Holmes; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-11-21       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Primary care providers' responses to patient-generated family history.

Authors:  Melissa Fuller; Melanie Myers; Thomas Webb; Meredith Tabangin; Cynthia Prows
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-10-24       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Why are Korean American physicians reluctant to recommend colorectal cancer screening to Korean American patients? Exploratory interview findings.

Authors:  Angela M Jo; Annette E Maxwell; Albert J Rick; Jennifer Cha; Roshan Bastani
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2008-07-08

Review 6.  Improving colorectal cancer screening in primary care practice: innovative strategies and future directions.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; David Lanier; Erica S Breslau; Jane G Zapka; Robert H Fletcher; David F Ransohoff; Sidney J Winawer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Incorporating cancer risk information into general practice: a qualitative study using focus groups with health professionals.

Authors:  Juliet A Usher-Smith; Barbora Silarova; Alison Ward; Jane Youell; Kenneth R Muir; Jackie Campbell; Joanne Warcaba
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 5.386

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.