BACKGROUND: The cancer family history can be used to stratify risk and guide management regarding screening and prevention of cancer. OBJECTIVE: The current study was designed to gain understanding of specific barriers to obtaining and using the cancer family history for the primary care physician. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with structured samples of specialists in family medicine, general internal medicine and gynaecology in three settings in two north-eastern states. A medical anthropologist conducted interviews based on a topical outline; transcripts were systematically analyzed by a research team to identify major themes expressed by participants. RESULTS: Among 40 urban, suburban and rural physicians interviewed, 40% were women and medical school graduation years ranged from 1963 to 2000. These physicians regarded cancer family history as important, but process and content were not standardized. Major barriers to more focused use of this information included limitations of patients' family history knowledge; time needed to clarify and interpret this information and the lack of clear and accessible guidelines to assist in collection, interpretation and management decisions for average, moderate and higher risk patients. Language and cultural barriers made it more difficult to collect family histories in some populations. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to effective application of cancer family history information included limitations of patients' family history information; lack of methods to systematically and efficiently focus on the most useful information and lack of accessible guidance for risk stratification and management. Results suggest a need for support addressing these concerns to better utilize several readily available cancer risk management opportunities.
BACKGROUND: The cancer family history can be used to stratify risk and guide management regarding screening and prevention of cancer. OBJECTIVE: The current study was designed to gain understanding of specific barriers to obtaining and using the cancer family history for the primary care physician. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with structured samples of specialists in family medicine, general internal medicine and gynaecology in three settings in two north-eastern states. A medical anthropologist conducted interviews based on a topical outline; transcripts were systematically analyzed by a research team to identify major themes expressed by participants. RESULTS: Among 40 urban, suburban and rural physicians interviewed, 40% were women and medical school graduation years ranged from 1963 to 2000. These physicians regarded cancer family history as important, but process and content were not standardized. Major barriers to more focused use of this information included limitations of patients' family history knowledge; time needed to clarify and interpret this information and the lack of clear and accessible guidelines to assist in collection, interpretation and management decisions for average, moderate and higher risk patients. Language and cultural barriers made it more difficult to collect family histories in some populations. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to effective application of cancer family history information included limitations of patients' family history information; lack of methods to systematically and efficiently focus on the most useful information and lack of accessible guidance for risk stratification and management. Results suggest a need for support addressing these concerns to better utilize several readily available cancer risk management opportunities.
Authors: June C Carroll; Judith Belle Brown; Sean Blaine; Gord Glendon; Patricia Pugh; Wendy Medved Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Kristin B Niendorf; Melissa A Geller; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Timothy R Church; Anna Leininger; Angela Bakke; Robert D Madoff Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Adam H Buchanan; Carol A Christianson; Tiffany Himmel; Karen P Powell; Astrid Agbaje; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Vincent C Henrich; Lori A Orlando Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Karen H Lu; Marie E Wood; Molly Daniels; Cathy Burke; James Ford; Noah D Kauff; Wendy Kohlmann; Noralane M Lindor; Therese M Mulvey; Linda Robinson; Wendy S Rubinstein; Elena M Stoffel; Carrie Snyder; Sapna Syngal; Janette K Merrill; Dana Swartzberg Wollins; Kevin S Hughes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kailey M Owens; Monica L Marvin; Thomas D Gelehrter; Mack T Ruffin; Wendy R Uhlmann Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2011-06-24 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Brian S Flynn; Marie E Wood; Takamaru Ashikaga; Alan Stockdale; Greg S Dana; Shelly Naud Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2010-06-03 Impact factor: 2.497