Literature DB >> 26265201

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Celette Sugg Skinner1, Ethan A Halm2, Wendy Pechero Bishop3, Chul Ahn4, Samir Gupta5, David Farrell6, Jay Morrow7, Manjula Julka8, Katharine McCallister3, Joanne M Sanders3, Emily Marks3, Susan M Rawl9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening is effective but underused. Guidelines for which tests are recommended and at what intervals depend on specific risks. We developed a tablet-based Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) that asks questions about risk prior to appointments and generates tailored printouts for patients and physicians summarizing and matching risk factors with guideline-based recommendations.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trial among patients who: (i) used CRIS and they and their physicians received tailored printouts; (ii) used CRIS to answer questions but received standard information about cancer screening while their physicians received a standard electronic chart prompt indicating they were age-eligible but not currently adherent for colorectal cancer screening; or (iii) comprised a no-contact group that neither used CRIS nor received any information while their physicians received the standard prompt. Participation in testing was assessed via electronic medical record at 12 months.
RESULTS: Participation in any colorectal cancer testing was three times higher for those who used the CRIS and received any printed materials, compared with no-contact controls (47% vs. 16%; P < 0.0001). Among CRIS users ages 50 and older, participation in any testing was higher in the tailored group (53% vs. 44%, P = 0.023).
CONCLUSION: Use of CRIS and receipt of any information facilitated participation in testing. There was more testing participation in the CRIS-tailored than nontailored group. IMPACT: Asking patients questions about their specific risk factors and giving them and their providers information just prior to an appointment may increase participation in colorectal cancer testing. Tailoring the information has some added benefit. ©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26265201      PMCID: PMC4592452          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0122

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  25 in total

1.  Recruiting patients to medical research: double blind randomised trial of "opt-in" versus "opt-out" strategies.

Authors:  Cornelia Junghans; Gene Feder; Harry Hemingway; Adam Timmis; Melvyn Jones
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-09-12

2.  Recording, interpreting, and updating the family history of cancer: implications for cancer prevention.

Authors:  Louise S Acheson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Family health history: the case for better tools.

Authors:  Brandon M Welch; Willard Dere; Joshua D Schiffman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  Systematic review: enhancing the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Debra J Holden; Daniel E Jonas; Deborah S Porterfield; Daniel Reuland; Russell Harris
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Implementation intentions and colorectal screening: a randomized trial in safety-net clinics.

Authors:  K Allen Greiner; Christine M Daley; Aaron Epp; Aimee James; Hung-Wen Yeh; Mugur Geana; Wendi Born; Kimberly K Engelman; Jeremy Shellhorn; Christina M Hester; Joseph LeMaster; Daniel C Buckles; Edward F Ellerbeck
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 5.043

6.  A randomized controlled trial of the impact of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Ronald E Myers; Randa Sifri; Terry Hyslop; Michael Rosenthal; Sally W Vernon; James Cocroft; Thomas Wolf; Jocelyn Andrel; Richard Wender
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Inherited predisposition to cancer: a historical overview.

Authors:  Henry T Lynch; Trudy G Shaw; Jane F Lynch
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2004-08-15       Impact factor: 3.908

8.  Computer-delivered tailored intervention improves colon cancer screening knowledge and health beliefs of African-Americans.

Authors:  Susan M Rawl; Celette Sugg Skinner; Susan M Perkins; Jeffrey Springston; Hsiao-Lan Wang; Kathleen M Russell; Yan Tong; Netsanet Gebregziabher; Connie Krier; Esther Smith-Howell; Tawana Brady-Watts; Laura J Myers; Deborah Ballard; Broderick Rhyant; Deanna R Willis; Thomas F Imperiale; Victoria L Champion
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2012-08-27

9.  Using tailored telephone counseling to accelerate the adoption of colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Mary E Costanza; Roger Luckmann; Anne M Stoddard; Mary Jo White; Jennifer R Stark; Jill S Avrunin; Milagros C Rosal; Lynn Clemow
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  2007-07-23

10.  Randomized trial of DVD, telephone, and usual care for increasing mammography adherence.

Authors:  Victoria L Champion; Susan M Rawl; Sara A Bourff; Kristen M Champion; Lisa G Smith; Adam H Buchanan; Laura J Fish; Patrick O Monahan; Timothy E Stump; Jeffery K Springston; Wambui G Gathirua-Mwangi; Celette Sugg Skinner
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2014-07-28
View more
  12 in total

1.  Current use and costs of electronic health records for clinical trial research: a descriptive study.

Authors:  Kimberly A Mc Cord; Hannah Ewald; Aviv Ladanie; Matthias Briel; Benjamin Speich; Heiner C Bucher; Lars G Hemkens
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2019-02-03

2.  Recommendation of colorectal cancer testing among primary care patients younger than 50 with elevated risk.

Authors:  Celette Sugg Skinner; Chul Ahn; Ethan A Halm; Wendy Pechero Bishop; Katharine McCallister; Joanne M Sanders; David Farrell; Noel Santini; Amit G Singal
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  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

Review 4.  The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care.

Authors:  Kaveh G Shojania; Alison Jennings; Alain Mayhew; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Jeremy Grimshaw
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-07-08

5.  Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Primary Care Setting in Turkey.

Authors:  Mustafa Kursat Sahin; Servet Aker; Hatice Nilden Arslan
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2017-02

6.  Computer-tailored intervention increases colorectal cancer screening among low-income African Americans in primary care: Results of a randomized trial.

Authors:  Susan M Rawl; Shannon M Christy; Susan M Perkins; Yan Tong; Connie Krier; Hsiao-Lan Wang; Amelia M Huang; Esther Laury; Broderick Rhyant; Frank Lloyd; Deanna R Willis; Thomas F Imperiale; Laura J Myers; Jeffrey Springston; Celette Sugg Skinner; Victoria L Champion
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Tailored information increases patient/physician discussion of colon cancer risk and testing: The Cancer Risk Intake System trial.

Authors:  Celette Sugg Skinner; Samir Gupta; Wendy Pechero Bishop; Chul Ahn; Jasmin A Tiro; Ethan A Halm; David Farrell; Emily Marks; Jay Morrow; Manjula Julka; Katharine McCallister; Joanne M Sanders; Susan M Rawl
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2016-04-30

8.  Colonoscopy uptake for high-risk individuals with a family history of colorectal neoplasia: A multicenter, randomized trial of tailored counseling versus standard information.

Authors:  Isabelle Ingrand; Gautier Defossez; Jean-Pierre Richer; David Tougeron; Nicolas Palierne; Jean-Christophe Letard; Michel Beauchant; Pierre Ingrand
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.889

9.  Outcomes associated with use of the Cancer Risk Intake System among primary care safety-net patients identified as needing colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Celette Sugg Skinner; Chul Ahn; Amit G Singal; Rasmi G Nair; Ethan A Halm; Wendy Pechero; Katharine McCallister; Joanne M Sanders; David Farrell; Noel Santini
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2019-10-21

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.