Literature DB >> 25122819

Colorectal cancer risk information presented by a nonphysician assistant does not increase screening rates.

Thad Wilkins1, Ralph A Gillies2, Pina Panchal3, Mittal Patel4, Peter Warren5, Robert R Schade6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of presenting individualized colorectal cancer (CRC) risk information for increasing CRC screening rates in primary care patients at above-average risk of CRC.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Georgia Regents University in Augusta-an academic family medicine clinic in the southeastern United States. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients (50 to 70 years of age) scheduled for routine visits in the family medicine clinic who were determined to be at above-average risk of CRC.
INTERVENTIONS: Individualized CRC risk information calculated from the Your Disease Risk tool compared with a standard CRC screening handout. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intention to complete CRC screening. Secondary measures included the proportions of subjects completing fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy.
RESULTS: A total of 1147 consecutive records were reviewed to determine eligibility. Overall, 210 (37.7%) of 557 eligible participants were randomized to receive either individualized CRC risk information (prepared by a research assistant) or a standard CRC screening handout. The intervention group had a mean (SD) age of 55.7 (4.8) years and the control group had a mean (SD) age of 55.6 (4.6) years. Two-thirds of the participants in each group were female. The intervention group and the control group were matched by race (P = .40). There was no significant difference between groups for intention to complete CRC screening (P = .58). Overall, 26.7% of the intervention participants and 27.7% of the control participants completed 1 or more CRC screening tests (P = .66).
CONCLUSION: Presentation of individualized CRC risk information by a nonphysician assistant as a decision aid did not result in higher CRC screening rates in primary care patients compared with presentation of general CRC screening information. Future research is needed to determine if physician presentation of CRC risk information would result in increased screening rates compared with research assistant presentation. Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25122819      PMCID: PMC4131964     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  19 in total

1.  Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence.

Authors:  F Citarda; G Tomaselli; R Capocaccia; S Barcherini; M Crespi
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Tailored computer-based cancer risk communication: correcting colorectal cancer risk perception.

Authors:  Karen M Emmons; Mei Wong; Elaine Puleo; Neil Weinstein; Robert Fletcher; Graham Colditz
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr

Review 3.  Individual-level factors in colorectal cancer screening: a review of the literature on the relation of individual-level health behavior constructs and screening behavior.

Authors:  Marc T Kiviniemi; Alyssa Bennett; Marie Zaiter; James R Marshall
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 3.894

4.  A qualitative evaluation of the Harvard Cancer Risk Index.

Authors:  K M Emmons; S Koch-Weser; K Atwood; L Conboy; R Rudd; G Colditz
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  1999 Jul-Sep

5.  Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening. A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  M Pignone; R Harris; L Kinsinger
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2000-11-21       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Behavioral interventions to increase adherence in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  R E Myers; E A Ross; T A Wolf; A Balshem; C Jepson; L Millner
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Manipulating perceptions of colorectal cancer threat: implications for screening intentions and behaviors.

Authors:  Isaac M Lipkus; Lasonya G Green; Alfred Marcus
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2003 May-Jun

8.  Colon cancer: risk perceptions and risk communication.

Authors:  Neil D Weinstein; Kathy Atwood; Elaine Puleo; Robert Fletcher; Graham Colditz; Karen M Emmons
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb

9.  Intention to be screened over time for colorectal cancer in male automotive workers.

Authors:  Beatty G Watts; Sally W Vernon; Ronald E Myers; Barbara C Tilley
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Predictors of attendance in the United Kingdom flexible sigmoidoscopy screening trial.

Authors:  S Sutton; J Wardle; T Taylor; K McCaffery; S Williamson; R Edwards; J Cuzick; A Hart; J Northover; W Atkin
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.136

View more
  4 in total

1.  Effects of personalized colorectal cancer risk information on laypersons' interest in colorectal cancer screening: The importance of individual differences.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Christine W Duarte; Susannah Daggett; Andrea Siewers; Bill Killam; Kahsi A Smith; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2015-07-19

2.  Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael K Dougherty; Alison T Brenner; Seth D Crockett; Shivani Gupta; Stephanie B Wheeler; Manny Coker-Schwimmer; Laura Cubillos; Teri Malo; Daniel S Reuland
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 21.873

3.  Effects of Personalized Risk Information on Patients Referred for Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Christine Lary; Adam Black; Caitlin Gutheil; Hayley Mandeville; Jason Yahwak; Mayuko Fukunaga
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-10-20       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Screening for colorectal cancer: the role of the primary care physician.

Authors:  John K Triantafillidis; Constantine Vagianos; Aristofanis Gikas; Maria Korontzi; Apostolos Papalois
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.566

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.