Literature DB >> 21915765

Bringing an organizational perspective to the optimal number of colorectal cancer screening options debate.

Melissa R Partin1, Adam A Powell, Diana J Burgess, Timothy J Wilt.   

Abstract

Improving colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates represents a challenge for primary care providers. Some have argued that offering a choice of CRC screening modes to patients will improve the currently low adherence rates. Others have raised concerns that offering numerous CRC screening options in practice could overwhelm patients and thus dampen enthusiasm for screening. In this article we assemble evidence to critically evaluate the relative merit of these opposing views. We find little evidence to support the hypothesis that the number of options offered will affect adherence (either positively or negatively), or that expanding the modalities offered beyond FOBT and colonoscopy will improve patient satisfaction. Therefore, we assert future decisions about the number of CRC screening modes to offer would more productively be focused on considerations such as what benefit the health-care organization would derive from offering additional modes, and how this change would affect other critical components of a successful screening program such as timely diagnosis. In light of these organizational level considerations, we agree with the assertion made by others that a screening program limited to FOBT and colonoscopy is likely to be ideal in most settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21915765      PMCID: PMC3286551          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1870-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  54 in total

1.  The theory of decision making.

Authors:  W EDWARDS
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1954-07       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  The bottom line: offer the colorectal cancer screening test that you can deliver.

Authors:  Deborah A Fisher
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-12-14       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Attitudes toward colorectal cancer screening tests.

Authors:  B S Ling; M A Moskowitz; D Wachs; B Pearson; P C Schroy
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Informed decision making changes test preferences for colorectal cancer screening in a diverse population.

Authors:  Navkiran K Shokar; Carol A Carlson; Susan C Weller
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

5.  Longitudinal adherence with fecal occult blood test screening in community practice.

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

6.  Measuring quality of care in the treatment of colorectal cancer: the moffitt quality practice initiative.

Authors:  Paul B Jacobsen; David Shibata; Erin M Siegel; Mihaela Druta; Ji-Hyun Lee; Jan Marshburn; Linda Davenport; Hugh Cruse; Richard Levine; Avantica Gondi; Richard Brown; Mokenge Malafa
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.840

7.  Community-based preferences for stool cards versus colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Ann C DeBourcy; Scott Lichtenberger; Susanne Felton; Kiel T Butterfield; Dennis J Ahnen; Thomas D Denberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Reasons patients with a positive fecal occult blood test result do not undergo complete diagnostic evaluation.

Authors:  Masahito Jimbo; Ronald E Myers; Birgit Meyer; Terry Hyslop; James Cocroft; Barbara J Turner; David S Weinberg
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

9.  Challenges in the management of positive fecal occult blood tests.

Authors:  Sandhya K Rao; Thad F Schilling; Thomas D Sequist
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  Karine Gravel; France Légaré; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  1 in total

1.  Preferences for different diagnostic modalities to follow up abnormal colorectal cancer screening results: a hypothetical vignette study.

Authors:  Aradhna Kaushal; Sandro Tiziano Stoffel; Robert Kerrison; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-26       Impact factor: 2.692

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.