Joshua J Fenton1, Peter Franks, Robert J Reid, Joann G Elmore, Laura-Mae Baldwin. 1. Department of Family and Community Medicine and Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California 95817, USA. Joshua.fenton@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu
Abstract
CONTEXT: Although having a usual source of care has been associated with cancer screening, whether there is additional benefit from continuity with a specific physician is uncertain. In addition, little is known about the relationship between continuity of care and receipt of colorectal and prostate cancer screening. METHODS: Subjects were enrolled in a Washington State health plan that operates an integrated delivery system that emphasizes access to primary care. Among patients age 50-78 years old with 2 or more primary care visits in 2002-2003 (N = 67,633), we determined whether higher continuity (>/=50% of visits with the most visited primary care provider) was associated with colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening. Random-effects logistic regression estimated adjusted percentages of patients who received fecal occult blood testing, lower endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy), screening mammography, and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing. RESULTS: Patients with higher continuity were more likely to receive fecal occult blood testing than patients with lower continuity (28.9% vs. 26.8%; P < 0.001) but less likely to receive lower endoscopy (12.9% vs. 14.3%; P < 0.001). Although higher continuity was not significantly associated with screening mammography (P = 0.38), men with higher continuity were more likely to receive PSA testing than men with lower continuity (39.4% vs. 37.4%; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In an insured population with a high degree of primary care access, continuity with a specific primary care physician was associated with the selection of less invasive colorectal cancer screening tests by patients and physicians and greater likelihood of PSA testing.
CONTEXT: Although having a usual source of care has been associated with cancer screening, whether there is additional benefit from continuity with a specific physician is uncertain. In addition, little is known about the relationship between continuity of care and receipt of colorectal and prostate cancer screening. METHODS: Subjects were enrolled in a Washington State health plan that operates an integrated delivery system that emphasizes access to primary care. Among patients age 50-78 years old with 2 or more primary care visits in 2002-2003 (N = 67,633), we determined whether higher continuity (>/=50% of visits with the most visited primary care provider) was associated with colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening. Random-effects logistic regression estimated adjusted percentages of patients who received fecal occult blood testing, lower endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy), screening mammography, and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing. RESULTS:Patients with higher continuity were more likely to receive fecal occult blood testing than patients with lower continuity (28.9% vs. 26.8%; P < 0.001) but less likely to receive lower endoscopy (12.9% vs. 14.3%; P < 0.001). Although higher continuity was not significantly associated with screening mammography (P = 0.38), men with higher continuity were more likely to receive PSA testing than men with lower continuity (39.4% vs. 37.4%; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In an insured population with a high degree of primary care access, continuity with a specific primary care physician was associated with the selection of less invasive colorectal cancer screening tests by patients and physicians and greater likelihood of PSA testing.
Authors: Jessica R Schumacher; Whitney P Witt; Mari Palta; Noelle K Loconte; Susan M Heidrich; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Nancy Pandhi; Maureen A Smith Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2012 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Nancy Pandhi; Jennifer E DeVoe; Jessica R Schumacher; Christie Bartels; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Maureen A Smith Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2011 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Erinn M Hade; David M Murray; Michael L Pennell; Dale Rhoda; Electra D Paskett; Victoria L Champion; Benjamin F Crabtree; Allen Dietrich; Mark B Dignan; Melissa Farmer; Joshua J Fenton; Susan Flocke; Robert A Hiatt; Shawna V Hudson; Michael Mitchell; Patrick Monahan; Salma Shariff-Marco; Stacey L Slone; Kurt Stange; Susan L Stewart; Pamela A Ohman Strickland Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2010
Authors: Lisa L Cook; Richard P Golonka; Charles M Cook; Robin L Walker; Peter Faris; Shannon Spenceley; Richard Lewanczuk; Robert Wedel; Rebecca Love; Cheryl Andres; Susan D Byers; Tim Collins; Scott Oddie Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2020-11-16
Authors: Joshua J Fenton; Joann G Elmore; Diana S M Buist; Robert J Reid; Daniel J Tancredi; Laura-Mae Baldwin Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Amy McQueen; L Kay Bartholomew; Anthony J Greisinger; Gilda G Medina; Sarah T Hawley; Paul Haidet; Judith L Bettencourt; Navkiran K Shokar; Bruce S Ling; Sally W Vernon Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-09-18 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Carrie M Nielson; William M Vollmer; Amanda F Petrik; Erin M Keast; Beverly B Green; Gloria D Coronado Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 5.128