Literature DB >> 21652776

Primary care colorectal cancer screening recommendation patterns: associated factors and screening outcomes.

Adrianne C Feldstein1,2, Nancy Perrin1, Elizabeth G Liles1,2, David H Smith1, Ana G Rosales1, Jennifer L Schneider1, Jennifer E Lafata3, Ronald E Myers4, David M Mosen1, Russell E Glasgow5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The relationship of a primary care provider's (PCP's) colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies to completion of screening is poorly understood.
OBJECTIVE: To describe PCP test recommendation patterns and associated factors and their relationship to patient test completion.
DESIGN: This cross-sectional study used a PCP survey, in-depth PCP interviews, and electronic medical records.
SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Northwest health maintenance organization. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 132 PCPs and 49,259 eligible patients aged 51 to 75. MEASUREMENTS: The authors grouped PCPs by patterns of CRC screening recommendations based on reported frequency of recommending fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), and colonoscopy. They then compared PCP demographics, reported CRC screening test influences, concerns, decision-making and counseling processes, and actual rates of patient CRC screening completion by PCP group.
RESULTS: The authors identified 4 CRC screening recommendation groups: a "balanced" group (n = 54; 40.9%) that recommended the tests nearly equally, an FOBT group (n = 31; 23.5%) that largely recommended FOBT, an FOBT + FS group (n = 25; 18.9%), and a colonoscopy + FOBT group (n = 22; 16.7%) that recommended these tests nearly equally. Internal medicine (v. family medicine) PCPs were more common in groups more frequently recommending endoscopy. The FOBT and FOBT + FS groups were most influenced by clinical guidelines. Groups recommending more endoscopy were most concerned that FOBT generates a relatively high number of false positives and FOBT can miss cancers. The FOBT and FOBT + FS groups were more likely to recommend a specific screening strategy compared to the colonoscopy + FOBT and balanced groups, which were more likely to let the patient decide. CRC screening rates were 63.9% balanced, 62.9% FOBT, 61.7% FOBT + FS, and 62.2% colonoscopy + FOBT; rates did not differ significantly by group. LIMITATIONS: Small numbers within PCP groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Specialty, the influence of guidelines, test concerns, and the "jointness" of the test selection decision distinguished CRC screening recommendation patterns. All patterns were associated with similar overall screening rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21652776      PMCID: PMC3624016          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11406285

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  24 in total

1.  The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J S Mandel; T R Church; J H Bond; F Ederer; M S Geisser; S J Mongin; D C Snover; L M Schuman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of reports from primary care physicians and average-risk adults.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Sally W Vernon; Marion R Nadel; Nancy Breen; Laura C Seeff; Martin L Brown
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening: research design and baseline findings.

Authors:  R E Myers; B Turner; D Weinberg; W W Hauck; T Hyslop; T Brigham; T Rothermel; J Grana; N Schlackman
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.018

4.  Predictors of stage of adoption for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  G A Brenes; E D Paskett
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Factors associated with colon cancer screening: the role of patient factors and physician counseling.

Authors:  Christina C Wee; Ellen P McCarthy; Russell S Phillips
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-12-29       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 6.  Cancer statistics, 2004.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Ram C Tiwari; Taylor Murray; Asma Ghafoor; Alicia Samuels; Elizabeth Ward; Eric J Feuer; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Primary care provider perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in a managed care setting.

Authors:  Gareth S Dulai; Melissa M Farmer; Patricia A Ganz; Coen A Bernaards; Karen Qi; Allen J Dietrich; Roshan Bastani; Michael J Belman; Katherine L Kahn
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by once-only sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  W S Atkin; J Cuzick; J M Northover; D K Whynes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-03-20       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population.

Authors:  Laura C Seeff; Marion R Nadel; Carrie N Klabunde; Trevor Thompson; Jean A Shapiro; Sally W Vernon; Ralph J Coates
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  S J Winawer; B J Flehinger; D Schottenfeld; D G Miller
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-08-18       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  6 in total

1.  Primary Care Physicians' Support of Shared Decision Making for Different Cancer Screening Decisions.

Authors:  Jennifer Elston Lafata; Richard F Brown; Michael P Pignone; Scott Ratliff; L Aubree Shay
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Reasons for non-response to a direct-mailed FIT kit program: lessons learned from a pragmatic colorectal-cancer screening study in a federally sponsored health center.

Authors:  Gloria D Coronado; Jennifer L Schneider; Jennifer J Sanchez; Amanda F Petrik; Beverly Green
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  The association of perceived provider-patient communication and relationship quality with colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Meghan L Underhill; Marc T Kiviniemi
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2011-10-10

4.  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

5.  Managed care patients' preferences, physician recommendations, and colon cancer screening.

Authors:  Sarah Hawley; Sarah Lillie; Greg Cooper; Jennifer Elston Lafata
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.229

6.  A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Lisa Carter-Harris; Susan Brandzel; Karen J Wernli; Joshua A Roth; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 2.267

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.