Aubri S Hoffman1, Lisa M Lowenstein1, Geetanjali R Kamath1, Ashley J Housten1, Viola B Leal1, Suzanne K Linder2, Maria L Jibaja-Weiss3, Gottumukkala S Raju4, Robert J Volk1. 1. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 2. Division of Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, Texas. 3. School of Allied Health Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Colorectal cancer screening rates for African American patients remain suboptimal. Patient decision aids designed with an entertainment-education approach have been shown to improve saliency and foster informed decision making. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an entertainment-education decision aid tailored for African American patients improved patients' decision making, attitudes, intentions, or colorectal cancer screening behavior. METHODS:Eighty-nine participants were randomized to view 1) a patient decision aid video containing culturally tailored information about colorectal cancer screening options and theory-based support in decision making presented in an entertainment-education format or 2) an attention control video about hypertension that contained similarly detailed information. Participants met with their clinician and then completed follow-up questionnaires assessing theirknowledge, decisional conflict, self-advocacy, attitudes, perceived social norms, and intentions. At 3 months, completion of screening was assessed by chart review. RESULTS: Viewing the culturally tailored decision aid significantly increased African American patients' knowledge of colorectal cancer screening recommendations and options. It also significantly reduced their decisional conflict and improved their self-advocacy. No significant differences were observed in participants' attitudes, norms, or intentions. At three months, 23% of all patients had completed a colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Designing targeted, engaging patient decision aids for groups that receive suboptimal screening holds promise for improving patient decision making and self-advocacy. Additional research is warranted to investigate the effectiveness of such aids in clinical practices with suboptimal screening rates and on downstream behaviors (such as repeat testing). Cancer 2017;123:1401-1408.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Colorectal cancer screening rates for African American patients remain suboptimal. Patient decision aids designed with an entertainment-education approach have been shown to improve saliency and foster informed decision making. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an entertainment-education decision aid tailored for African American patients improved patients' decision making, attitudes, intentions, or colorectal cancer screening behavior. METHODS: Eighty-nine participants were randomized to view 1) a patient decision aid video containing culturally tailored information about colorectal cancer screening options and theory-based support in decision making presented in an entertainment-education format or 2) an attention control video about hypertension that contained similarly detailed information. Participants met with their clinician and then completed follow-up questionnaires assessing their knowledge, decisional conflict, self-advocacy, attitudes, perceived social norms, and intentions. At 3 months, completion of screening was assessed by chart review. RESULTS: Viewing the culturally tailored decision aid significantly increased African American patients' knowledge of colorectal cancer screening recommendations and options. It also significantly reduced their decisional conflict and improved their self-advocacy. No significant differences were observed in participants' attitudes, norms, or intentions. At three months, 23% of all patients had completed a colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Designing targeted, engaging patient decision aids for groups that receive suboptimal screening holds promise for improving patient decision making and self-advocacy. Additional research is warranted to investigate the effectiveness of such aids in clinical practices with suboptimal screening rates and on downstream behaviors (such as repeat testing). Cancer 2017;123:1401-1408.
Authors: Amir Qaseem; Thomas D Denberg; Robert H Hopkins; Linda L Humphrey; Joel Levine; Donna E Sweet; Paul Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Nancy C Dolan; M Rosario Ferreira; Marian L Fitzgibbon; Terry C Davis; Alfred W Rademaker; Dachao Liu; June Lee; Michael Wolf; Brian P Schmitt; Charles L Bennett Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jennifer M Griffith; Marlie Fichter; Floyd J Fowler; Carmen Lewis; Michael P Pignone Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2008-03-05 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Kirsten J McCaffery; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Sian K Smith; David Rovner; Don Nutbeam; Marla L Clayman; Karen Kelly-Blake; Michael S Wolf; Stacey L Sheridan Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Shannon M Christy; Steven K Sutton; Clement K Gwede; Enmanuel A Chavarria; Stacy N Davis; Rania Abdulla; Ida Schultz; Richard Roetzheim; David Shibata; Cathy D Meade Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Daniela B Friedman; Swann Arp Adams; Heather M Brandt; Sue P Heiney; James R Hébert; John R Ureda; Jessica S Seel; Courtney S Schrock; Wilhelmenia Mathias; Vivian Clark-Armstead; Reverend Vernette Dees; Reverend Perry Oliver Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 2.037
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
Authors: Terri Lynn Woodard; Aubri S Hoffman; Laura C Crocker; Deborah A Holman; Derek B Hoffman; Jusheng Ma; Roland L Bassett; Viola B Leal; Robert J Volk Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Aubri S Hoffman; Karen R Sepucha; Purva Abhyankar; Stacey Sheridan; Hilary Bekker; Annie LeBlanc; Carrie Levin; Mary Ropka; Victoria Shaffer; Dawn Stacey; Peep Stalmeier; Ha Vo; Celia Wills; Richard Thomson Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 7.418
Authors: Rebecca R Turner; Liz Steed; Helen Quirk; Rosa U Greasley; John M Saxton; Stephanie Jc Taylor; Derek J Rosario; Mohamed A Thaha; Liam Bourke Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-09-19
Authors: Aubri S Hoffman; Andrea P Hempstead; Ashley J Housten; Vincent F Richards; Lisa M Lowenstein; Viola B Leal; Robert J Volk Journal: MDM Policy Pract Date: 2018-04-19