Literature DB >> 7762712

Cancer screening by primary care physicians: a comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit.

D E Montaño1, W R Phillips.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study measured the cancer screening rates of family physicians and compared the measures obtained through physician self-reports, chart audits, and patient surveys.
METHODS: A cancer screening survey was sent to 50% of the members of the Washington Academy of Family Physicians, with 326 family physicians (74% response rate) completing the survey. Sixty physicians were recruited for the patient survey and chart audit phase, with a 90% participation rate. Patient surveys were conducted with about 350 patients per physician, and chart audits were conducted on a subset of about 50 patients per physician. Each physician's rate of providing each service was computed from the self-report, the patient survey, and the chart audit.
RESULTS: Physicians provided many of these services at rates different from those commonly recommended. Large discrepancies were found between the rates measured by different methods. Correlations between rates derived from chart audits and patient surveys were high; however, correlations between rates from physician self-report and either patient survey or chart audit were much lower for all services.
CONCLUSIONS: Studies of physicians' provision of cancer prevention services should not rely on physician self-report, but should obtain the rates through patient surveys or chart audits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7762712      PMCID: PMC1615496          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.85.6.795

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  13 in total

1.  Cancer: improving early detection and prevention. A community practice randomised trial.

Authors:  A J Dietrich; G T O'Connor; A Keller; P A Carney; D Levy; F S Whaley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-03-14

2.  Prevention in primary care: variability in physician practice patterns in New York City.

Authors:  D H Gemson; J Elinson
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1986 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  An intervention to increase mammography screening by residents in family practice.

Authors:  S Fox; C V Tsou; D S Klos
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 0.493

4.  Promoting cancer prevention activities by primary care physicians. Results of a randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  S J McPhee; J A Bird; D Fordham; J E Rodnick; E H Osborn
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1991 Jul 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  A controlled trial to improve delivery of preventive care: physician or patient reminders?

Authors:  B J Turner; S C Day; B Borenstein
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Preventive care for women. Does the sex of the physician matter?

Authors:  N Lurie; J Slater; P McGovern; J Ekstrum; L Quam; K Margolis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-08-12       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Preventive content of adult primary care: do generalists and subspecialists differ?

Authors:  A J Dietrich; H Goldberg
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Effect of continuing medical education and cost reduction on physician compliance with mammography screening guidelines.

Authors:  D S Lane; A P Polednak; M A Burg
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 0.493

9.  Performance of cancer screening in a university general internal medicine practice: comparison with the 1980 American Cancer Society Guidelines.

Authors:  S J McPhee; R J Richard; S N Solkowitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1986 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Determinants of primary medical practice in adult cancer prevention.

Authors:  R N Battista; J I Williams; L A MacFarlane
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  101 in total

1.  Variation in recommendations for cancer screening among primary care physicians in New Mexico.

Authors:  C J Herman; R M Hoffman; K K Altobelli
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  1999-08

2.  Papanicolaou test use among reproductive-age women at high risk for cervical cancer: analyses of the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth.

Authors:  Maria Hewitt; Susan Devesa; Nancy Breen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Skin cancer screening and prevention in the primary care setting: national ambulatory medical care survey 1997.

Authors:  S A Oliveria; P J Christos; A A Marghoob; A C Halpern
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Current awareness in Canada of clinical practice guidelines for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Tracey K Asano; Daniel Toma; Hartley S Stern; Robin S McLeod
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 5.  Measuring adherence to practice guidelines for the management of hypertension: an evaluation of the literature.

Authors:  Jessica L Milchak; Barry L Carter; Paul A James; Gail Ardery
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2004-09-20       Impact factor: 10.190

6.  The effect of access and satisfaction on regular mammogram and Papanicolaou test screening in a multiethnic population.

Authors:  Carol P Somkin; Stephen J McPhee; Tung Nguyen; Susan Stewart; Sarah J Shema; Bang Nguyen; Rena Pasick
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  The effects of cost sharing on access to care among childless adults.

Authors:  Gery P Guy
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Smoking cessation counseling with pregnant and postpartum women: a survey of community health center providers.

Authors:  J G Zapka; L Pbert; A M Stoddard; J K Ockene; K V Goins; D Bonollo
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  A comparison of the preventive health care provided by women's health centers and general internal medicine practices.

Authors:  L H Harpole; E A Mort; K M Freund; J Orav; T A Brennan
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Rural vs urban residence affects risk-appropriate colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Allison E Anderson; Kevin A Henry; N Jewel Samadder; Ray M Merrill; Anita Y Kinney
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 11.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.