Literature DB >> 33503497

Design and rationale of an intervention to improve cancer prevention using clinical decision support and shared decision making: A clinic-randomized trial.

Thomas E Elliott1, Patrick J O'Connor2, Stephen E Asche3, Daniel M Saman4, Steven P Dehmer5, Heidi L Ekstrom6, Clayton I Allen7, Joseph A Bianco8, Ella A Chrenka9, Laura A Freitag10, Melissa L Harry11, Anjali R Truitt12, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen13.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite decades of research the gap in primary and secondary cancer prevention services in the U. S. remains unacceptably wide. Innovative interventions are needed to address this persistent challenge. Electronic health records linked with Web-based clinical decision support may close this gap, especially if delivered to both patients and their providers.
OBJECTIVES: The Cancer Prevention Wizard (CPW) study is an implementation, clinic-randomized trial designed to achieve these aims: 1) assess impact of the Cancer Prevention Wizard-Clinical Decision Support (CPW-CDS) alone and CPW-CDS plus Shared Decision Making Tools (CPW + SDMTs) compared to usual care (UC) on tobacco cessation counseling and drugs, HPV vaccinations, and screening tests for breast, cervical, colorectal, or lung cancer; 2) assess cost of the CPW-CDS intervention; and 3) describe critical facilitators and barriers for CPW-CDS implementation, use, and clinical impact using a mixed-methods approach supported by the CFIR and RE-AIM frameworks.
METHODS: 34 predominantly rural, primary care clinics were randomized to CPW-CDS, CPW + SMDTs, or UC. Between August 2018 and October 2020, primary care providers and their patients who met inclusion criteria in intervention clinics were exposed to the CPW-CDS with or without SDMTs. Study outcomes at 12 months post index visit include patients up to date on screening tests and HPV vaccinations, overall healthcare costs, and diagnostic codes and billing levels for cancer prevention services.
CONCLUSIONS: We will test in rural primary care settings whether CPW-CDS with or without SDMTs can improve delivery of primary and secondary cancer prevention services. The trial and analyses are ongoing with results expected in 2021.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical decision support; Cluster-randomized trial; Health informatics; Implementation research; Primary & secondary cancer prevention; Shared decision making

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33503497      PMCID: PMC8009827          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106271

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  50 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.

Authors:  R E Glasgow; T M Vogt; S M Boles
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Medications to decrease the risk for breast cancer in women: recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors:  Virginia A Moyer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Clinical decision support directed to primary care patients and providers reduces cardiovascular risk: a randomized trial.

Authors:  JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; A Lauren Crain; Karen L Margolis; Heidi L Ekstrom; Deepika Appana; Gerald Amundson; Rashmi Sharma; Jay R Desai; Patrick J O'Connor
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tiffani J Bright; Anthony Wong; Ravi Dhurjati; Erin Bristow; Lori Bastian; Remy R Coeytaux; Gregory Samsa; Vic Hasselblad; John W Williams; Michael D Musty; Liz Wing; Amy S Kendrick; Gillian D Sanders; David Lobach
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  How do family physicians prioritize delivery of multiple preventive services?

Authors:  K C Stange; T Fedirko; S J Zyzanski; C R Jaén
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 0.493

Review 8.  Interventions to increase recommendation and delivery of screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by healthcare providers systematic reviews of provider assessment and feedback and provider incentives.

Authors:  Susan A Sabatino; Nancy Habarta; Roy C Baron; Ralph J Coates; Barbara K Rimer; Jon Kerner; Steven S Coughlin; Geetika P Kalra; Sajal Chattopadhyay
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.043

9.  Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Computerized Decision Support System on Clinician Recommendations and Patient Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Lorenzo Moja; Hernan Polo Friz; Matteo Capobussi; Koren Kwag; Rita Banzi; Francesca Ruggiero; Marien González-Lorenzo; Elisa G Liberati; Massimo Mangia; Peter Nyberg; Ilkka Kunnamo; Claudio Cimminiello; Giuseppe Vighi; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Giovanni Delgrossi; Stefanos Bonovas
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-12-02

10.  Patterns and Trends in Cancer Screening in the United States.

Authors:  Ingrid J Hall; Florence K L Tangka; Susan A Sabatino; Trevor D Thompson; Barry I Graubard; Nancy Breen
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 2.830

View more
  5 in total

1.  Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Thomas E Elliott; Stephen E Asche; Patrick J O'Connor; Steven P Dehmer; Heidi L Ekstrom; Anjali R Truitt; Ella A Chrenka; Melissa L Harry; Daniel M Saman; Clayton I Allen; Joseph A Bianco; Laura A Freitag; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 2.749

2.  Patient Perceptions of Using Clinical Decision Support for Cancer Screening and Prevention: "I wouldn't have thought about getting screened without it."

Authors:  Daniel M Saman; Melissa L Harry; Laura A Freitag; Clayton I Allen; Patrick J O'Connor; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Joseph A Bianco; Anjali R Truitt; Heidi L Ekstrom; Thomas E Elliott
Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev       Date:  2021-10-18

3.  Primary care clinicians' opinions before and after implementation of cancer screening and prevention clinical decision support in a clinic cluster-randomized control trial: a survey research study.

Authors:  Melissa L Harry; Ella A Chrenka; Laura A Freitag; Daniel M Saman; Clayton I Allen; Stephen E Asche; Anjali R Truitt; Heidi L Ekstrom; Patrick J O'Connor; Jo Ann M Sperl-Hillen; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Thomas E Elliott
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Human Papillomavirus vaccination clinical decision support for young adults in an upper midwestern healthcare system: a clinic cluster-randomized control trial.

Authors:  Melissa L Harry; Stephen E Asche; Laura A Freitag; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Daniel M Saman; Heidi L Ekstrom; Ella A Chrenka; Anjali R Truitt; Clayton I Allen; Patrick J O'Connor; Steven P Dehmer; Joseph A Bianco; Thomas E Elliott
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 4.526

5.  The impact of personalized clinical decision support on primary care patients' views of cancer prevention and screening: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Daniel M Saman; Ella A Chrenka; Melissa L Harry; Clayton I Allen; Laura A Freitag; Stephen E Asche; Anjali R Truitt; Heidi L Ekstrom; Patrick J O'Connor; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Thomas E Elliott
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 2.655

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.