Literature DB >> 22312138

Vignette-based study of ovarian cancer screening: do U.S. physicians report adhering to evidence-based recommendations?

Laura-Mae Baldwin1, Katrina F Trivers, Barbara Matthews, C Holly A Andrilla, Jacqueline W Miller, Donna L Berry, Denise M Lishner, Barbara A Goff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: No professional society or group recommends routine ovarian cancer screening, yet physicians' enthusiasm for several cancer screening tests before benefit has been proven suggests that some women may be exposed to potential harms.
OBJECTIVE: To provide nationally representative estimates of physicians' reported nonadherence to recommendations against ovarian cancer screening.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of physicians offering women's primary care. The 12-page questionnaire contained a woman's annual examination vignette and questions about offers or orders for transvaginal ultrasonography (TVU) and cancer antigen 125 (CA-125).
SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: 3200 physicians randomly sampled equally from the 2008 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile lists of family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists; 61.7% responded. After exclusions, 1088 respondents were included; their responses were weighted to represent the specialty distribution of practicing U.S. physicians nationally. MEASUREMENTS: Reported nonadherence to screening recommendations (defined as sometimes or almost always ordering screening TVU or CA-125 or both).
RESULTS: Twenty-eight percent (95% CI, 24.5% to 32.9%) of physicians reported nonadherence to screening recommendations for women at low risk for ovarian cancer; 65.4% (CI, 61.1% to 69.4%) did so for women at medium risk for ovarian cancer. Six percent (CI, 4.4% to 8.9%) reported routinely ordering or offering ovarian cancer screening for low-risk women, as did 24.0% (CI, 20.5% to 28.0%) for medium-risk women (P ≤ 0.001). Thirty-three percent believed TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test. In adjusted analysis, actual and physician-perceived patient risk, patient request for ovarian cancer screening, and physician belief that TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test were the strongest predictors of physician-reported nonadherence to published recommendations. LIMITATION: The results are limited by their reliance on survey methods; there may be respondent-nonrespondent bias.
CONCLUSION: One in 3 physicians believed that ovarian cancer screening was effective, despite evidence to the contrary. Substantial proportions of physicians reported routinely offering or ordering ovarian cancer screening, thereby exposing women to the documented risks of these tests. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22312138     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-3-201202070-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  21 in total

1.  Physician Nonprofessional Cancer Experience and Ovarian Cancer Screening Practices: Results from a National Survey of Primary Care Physicians.

Authors:  Margaret Ragland; Katrina F Trivers; C Holly A Andrilla; Barbara Matthews; Jacqueline Miller; Denise Lishner; Barbara Goff; Laura-Mae Baldwin
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  Ovarian Cancer in Young Women.

Authors:  Eileen Lalrinpuii; Pallipuram Seshadrinathan Bhageerathy; Ajit Sebastian; Lakshmanan Jeyaseelan; Anitha Thomas; Rachel Chandy; Abraham Peedicayil
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-07-21

3.  Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change.

Authors:  Laura J Esserman; Ian M Thompson; Brian Reid; Peter Nelson; David F Ransohoff; H Gilbert Welch; Shelley Hwang; Donald A Berry; Kenneth W Kinzler; William C Black; Mina Bissell; Howard Parnes; Sudhir Srivastava
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 41.316

4.  Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and ovarian cancer screening in 1077 women after BRCA testing.

Authors:  Gabriel N Mannis; Julia E Fehniger; Jennifer S Creasman; Vanessa L Jacoby; Mary S Beattie
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Interpretation of single and serial measures of HE4 and CA125 in asymptomatic women at high risk for ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Nicole Urban; Jason Thorpe; Beth Y Karlan; Martin W McIntosh; Melanie R Palomares; Mary B Daly; Pamela Paley; Charles W Drescher
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Physicians' beliefs about effectiveness of cancer screening tests: a national survey of family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists.

Authors:  Jacqueline W Miller; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Barbara Matthews; Katrina F Trivers; C Holly Andrilla; Denise Lishner; Barbara A Goff
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Accuracy of ovarian and colon cancer risk assessments by U.S. physicians.

Authors:  Laura-Mae Baldwin; Katrina F Trivers; C Holly A Andrilla; Barbara Matthews; Jacqueline W Miller; Denise M Lishner; Barbara A Goff
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Assessing the risk of ovarian malignancy in asymptomatic women with abnormal CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasound scans in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian screening trial.

Authors:  Edward E Partridge; Robert T Greenlee; Thomas L Riley; John Commins; Lawrence Ragard; Jian-Lun Xu; Saundra S Buys; Philip C Prorok; Mona N Fouad
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Genetic variants in the fibroblast growth factor pathway as potential markers of ovarian cancer risk, therapeutic response, and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Qing H Meng; Enping Xu; Michelle A T Hildebrandt; Dong Liang; Karen Lu; Yuanqing Ye; Elizabeth A Wagar; Xifeng Wu
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2013-10-21       Impact factor: 8.327

10.  The case for intervention bias in the practice of medicine.

Authors:  Andrew J Foy; Edward J Filippone
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2013-06-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.