Susan D Brandzel1, Erin J Aiello Bowles2, Arika Wieneke3, Susan Carol Bradford4, Kilian Kimbel5, Hongyuan Gao6, Diana Sm Buist7. 1. Insights Director at Health Stories Project Insights in Seattle, WA. susan.brandzel@hspinsights.com. 2. Research Associate for Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. bowles.e@ghc.org. 3. Student in the School of Medicine at Western Michigan University in Kalamazoo. aewieneke@gmail.com. 4. Manager of Screening and Outreach for Kaiser Permanente Washington in Seattle. bradford.s@ghc.org. 5. Research Specialist for Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. kimbel.k@ghc.org. 6. Programmer at Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. gao.h@ghc.org. 7. Scientific Investigator for Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. buist.d@ghc.org.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Health care systems continue to seek evidence about how to optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of cancer screening reminders. Annual reminders to receive preventive services can be an efficient strategy. OBJECTIVE: To understand patient motivators and barriers to cancer screening and preferences about reminder strategies. DESIGN: We conducted 11 focus groups among adults recommended for cancer screening within Kaiser Permanente Washington. We held separate focus groups with women aged 21 to 49 years, women 50 to 75 years, and men 50 to 75 years. We used an inductive, validated coding scheme for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Motivators and barriers to obtaining recommended cancer screening and general cancer screening reminder content and modality preferences. RESULTS: Half of our participants were women aged 50 to 75 years, and 25% were men aged 50 to 75 years. Differences by age, sex, insurance status, financial status, and health beliefs all drove the participants' preferences for whether they seek these recommended services and how and when they wish to be reminded about recommended cancer screening. Most participants preferred personalized reminders, and many favored receiving reminders less than 3 months before the recommended procedure date rather than a consolidated annual reminder. Younger participants more commonly requested electronic reminders, such as texts and e-mails. CONCLUSION: Optimizing cancer screening reminders within a health care system involves a multifaceted approach that enables members to request which form of reminder they prefer (eg, electronic, paper, telephone) and the timing with which they want to be reminded, while staying affordable and manageable to the health care system.
CONTEXT: Health care systems continue to seek evidence about how to optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of cancer screening reminders. Annual reminders to receive preventive services can be an efficient strategy. OBJECTIVE: To understand patient motivators and barriers to cancer screening and preferences about reminder strategies. DESIGN: We conducted 11 focus groups among adults recommended for cancer screening within Kaiser Permanente Washington. We held separate focus groups with women aged 21 to 49 years, women 50 to 75 years, and men 50 to 75 years. We used an inductive, validated coding scheme for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Motivators and barriers to obtaining recommended cancer screening and general cancer screening reminder content and modality preferences. RESULTS: Half of our participants were women aged 50 to 75 years, and 25% were men aged 50 to 75 years. Differences by age, sex, insurance status, financial status, and health beliefs all drove the participants' preferences for whether they seek these recommended services and how and when they wish to be reminded about recommended cancer screening. Most participants preferred personalized reminders, and many favored receiving reminders less than 3 months before the recommended procedure date rather than a consolidated annual reminder. Younger participants more commonly requested electronic reminders, such as texts and e-mails. CONCLUSION: Optimizing cancer screening reminders within a health care system involves a multifaceted approach that enables members to request which form of reminder they prefer (eg, electronic, paper, telephone) and the timing with which they want to be reminded, while staying affordable and manageable to the health care system.
Authors: Jenna L Davis; Brian M Rivers; Desiree Rivers; Carolyn M Tucker; Frederic F Desmond; Tya M Arthur; Guillermo M Wippold; B Lee Green Journal: Am J Mens Health Date: 2015-03-17
Authors: Robert J Fortuna; Amna Idris; Paul Winters; Sharon G Humiston; Steven Scofield; Samantha Hendren; Patricia Ford; Shirley X L Li; Kevin Fiscella Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jennifer S Lin; Margaret A Piper; Leslie A Perdue; Carolyn M Rutter; Elizabeth M Webber; Elizabeth O'Connor; Ning Smith; Evelyn P Whitlock Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Erin G Stone; Sally C Morton; Marlies E Hulscher; Margaret A Maglione; Elizabeth A Roth; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Brian S Mittman; Lisa V Rubenstein; Laurence Z Rubenstein; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Susan Brandzel; Eva Chang; Leah Tuzzio; Camille Campbell; Nora Coronado; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Susan Carol Bradford; Diana S M Buist Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2016-11-18
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
Authors: Erin J Aiello Bowles; Hongyuan Gao; Susan Brandzel; Susan Carol Bradford; Diana S M Buist Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Carrie M Nielson; Jennifer S Rivelli; Morgan J Fuoco; Victoria R Gawlik; Ricardo Jimenez; Amanda F Petrik; Gloria D Coronado Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2018-10-17