Tracy A Battaglia1, Arlene Ash, Marianne N Prout, Karen M Freund. 1. Women's Health Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, 720 Harrison Avenue, DOB Suite 1108, Boston, MA 02118-2334, USA. Tracy.Battaglia@bmc.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the willingness of primary care providers (PCPs) to encourage enrollment of patients into cancer prevention trials. METHODS: A self-administered survey was mailed to a random sample of PCPs in three geographic regions. Physicians were asked questions about their knowledge and attitudes towards cancer prevention trials. We presented a clinical vignette of a woman at high risk for breast cancer and asked if they would encourage her enrollment into a breast cancer chemoprevention trial (yes/no). Each survey included one of 16 possible clinical vignettes where patient characteristics (age, race socioeconomic status, physical mobility and co-morbidity) varied dichotomously. Bivariate analyses and logistic models were used to examine the independent effects of patient and physician characteristics on physician decisions. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-six surveys (50% response) were analyzed. The mean age of respondents was 48; 54% were White, 35% Asian and 5% Black. By design physicians were evenly distributed by gender, specialty and geographic location. Overall, 53% would encourage enrollment into a breast cancer chemoprevention trial. Significant predictors of a recommendation to enroll were: geographic location in California or Georgia, younger vignette patient and anticipating an increase in patient trust after recommending enrollment. CONCLUSION: PCPs are less likely to encourage elderly patients to enroll into cancer chemoprevention trials. Decisions differ based on geographic location and perceived trust in the patient-provider relationship. To achieve successful enrollment, trial investigators must continue to educate PCPs and ensure a strong PCP-patient relationship is maintained.
BACKGROUND: To explore the willingness of primary care providers (PCPs) to encourage enrollment of patients into cancer prevention trials. METHODS: A self-administered survey was mailed to a random sample of PCPs in three geographic regions. Physicians were asked questions about their knowledge and attitudes towards cancer prevention trials. We presented a clinical vignette of a woman at high risk for breast cancer and asked if they would encourage her enrollment into a breast cancer chemoprevention trial (yes/no). Each survey included one of 16 possible clinical vignettes where patient characteristics (age, race socioeconomic status, physical mobility and co-morbidity) varied dichotomously. Bivariate analyses and logistic models were used to examine the independent effects of patient and physician characteristics on physician decisions. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-six surveys (50% response) were analyzed. The mean age of respondents was 48; 54% were White, 35% Asian and 5% Black. By design physicians were evenly distributed by gender, specialty and geographic location. Overall, 53% would encourage enrollment into a breast cancer chemoprevention trial. Significant predictors of a recommendation to enroll were: geographic location in California or Georgia, younger vignette patient and anticipating an increase in patient trust after recommending enrollment. CONCLUSION: PCPs are less likely to encourage elderly patients to enroll into cancer chemoprevention trials. Decisions differ based on geographic location and perceived trust in the patient-provider relationship. To achieve successful enrollment, trial investigators must continue to educate PCPs and ensure a strong PCP-patient relationship is maintained.
Authors: Carma L Bylund; Elisa S Weiss; Margo Michaels; Shilpa Patel; Thomas A D'Agostino; Emily B Peterson; Maria Christina Binz-Scharf; Natasha Blakeney; M Diane McKee Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Paul Hilton; Brian S Buckley; Elaine McColl; Denise Howel; Douglas G Tincello; Catherine Brennand Journal: Trials Date: 2016-10-26 Impact factor: 2.279