scholarly journals Health Care Provider Characteristics Associated With Colorectal Cancer Screening Preferences and Use

Author(s):  
Lila J. Finney Rutten ◽  
Philip D. Parks ◽  
Emily Weiser ◽  
Chun Fan ◽  
Debra J. Jacobson ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 601-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Gabriela Sava ◽  
James G. Dolan ◽  
Jerrold H. May ◽  
Luis G. Vargas

Background. Current colorectal cancer screening guidelines by the US Preventive Services Task Force endorse multiple options for average-risk patients and recommend that screening choices should be guided by individual patient preferences. Implementing these recommendations in practice is challenging because they depend on accurate and efficient elicitation and assessment of preferences from patients who are facing a novel task. Objective. To present a methodology for analyzing the sensitivity and stability of a patient’s preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening options and to provide a starting point for a personalized discussion between the patient and the health care provider about the selection of the appropriate screening option. Methods. This research is a secondary analysis of patient preference data collected as part of a previous study. We propose new measures of preference sensitivity and stability that can be used to determine if additional information provided would result in a change to the initially most preferred colorectal cancer screening option. Results. Illustrative results of applying the methodology to the preferences of 2 patients, of different ages, are provided. The results show that different combinations of screening options are viable for each patient and that the health care provider should emphasize different information during the medical decision-making process. Conclusion. Sensitivity and stability analysis can supply health care providers with key topics to focus on when communicating with a patient and the degree of emphasis to place on each of them to accomplish specific goals. The insights provided by the analysis can be used by health care providers to approach communication with patients in a more personalized way, by taking into consideration patients’ preferences before adding their own expertise to the discussion.


2011 ◽  
Vol 53 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 70-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shayna E. Rich ◽  
Fatmatta M. Kuyateh ◽  
Diane M. Dwyer ◽  
Carmela Groves ◽  
Eileen K. Steinberger

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (34) ◽  
pp. 8877-8883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Wolf ◽  
Karen A. Fitzner ◽  
Eowyn F. Powell ◽  
Kathryn R. McCaffrey ◽  
A. Simon Pickard ◽  
...  

Purpose Colorectal cancer screening is underused, particularly in the Veterans Affairs (VA) population. In a randomized controlled trial, a health care provider–directed intervention that offered quarterly feedback to physicians on their patients' colorectal cancer screening rates led to a 9% increase in colorectal cancer screening rates among veterans. The objective of this secondary analysis was to assess the cost effectiveness of the colorectal cancer screening promotion intervention. Methods Providers in the intervention arm attended an educational workshop on colorectal cancer screening and received confidential feedback on individual and group-specific colorectal cancer screening rates. The primary end point was completion of colorectal cancer screening tests. Sensitivity analyses investigated cost-effectiveness estimates varying the data collection methods, costs of labor and technology, and the effectiveness of the intervention. Results Rates of colorectal cancer screening for the intervention versus control arms were 41.3% v 32.4%, respectively (P < .05). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $978 per additional veteran screened based on feedback reports generated from manual review of records. However, if feedback reports could be generated from information technology systems, sensitivity analyses indicate that the cost-effectiveness estimate would decrease to $196 per additional veteran screened. Conclusion An intervention based on quarterly feedback reports to physicians improved colorectal cancer screening rates at a VA medical center. This intervention would be cost effective if relevant data could be generated by existing information technology systems. Our findings may have broad applicability because a 2005 Medicare initiative will provide the VA electronic medical record system as a free benefit to all US physicians.


2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 548-548
Author(s):  
Girish S. Kulkarni ◽  
Gina A. Lockwood ◽  
Andrew Evans ◽  
Arthy Saravanan ◽  
Michael A.S. Jewett ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (8) ◽  
pp. 1002-1006
Author(s):  
Rebecca Beatrix Clarke ◽  
Christina Therkildsen ◽  
Mie Agermose Gram ◽  
Klaus Kaae Andersen ◽  
Lina Steinrud Mørch ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pernille Gabel ◽  
Pia Kirkegaard ◽  
Mette Bach Larsen ◽  
Adrian Edwards ◽  
Berit Andersen

BACKGROUND Citizens with lower educational attainments (EA) take up colorectal cancer screening to a lesser degree, and more seldom read and understand conventional screening information than citizens with average EAs. The information needs of citizens with lower EA are diverse, however, with preferences ranging from wanting clear recommendations to seeking detailed information about screening. Decision aids have been developed to support citizens with lower EA in making informed decisions about colorectal cancer screening participation, but none embrace diverse information needs. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop a self-administered decision aid for participation in fecal immunochemical test–based colorectal cancer screening. The decision aid should be tailored to citizens with lower EA and should embrace diverse information needs. METHODS The Web-based decision aid was developed according to an international development framework, with specific steps for designing, alpha testing, peer reviewing, and beta testing the decision aid. In the design phase, a prototype of the decision aid was developed based on previous studies about the information needs of lower EA citizens and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards guidelines. Alpha testing was conducted using focus group interviews and email correspondence. Peer review was conducted using email correspondence. Both tests included both lower EA citizens and health care professionals. The beta testing was conducted using telephone interviews with citizens with lower EA. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS The developed decision aid presented information in steps, allowing citizens to read as much or as little as wanted. Values clarification questions were included after each section of information, and answers were summarized in a “choice-indicator” on the last page, guiding the citizens toward a decision about screening participation. Statistics were presented in both natural frequencies, absolute risk formats and graphically. The citizens easily and intuitively navigated around the final version of the decision aid and stated that they felt encouraged to think about the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer screening without being overloaded with information. They found the decision aid easy to understand and the text of suitable length. The health care professionals agreed with the citizens on most parts; however, concerns were raised about the length and readability of the text. CONCLUSIONS We have developed a self-administered decision aid presenting information in steps. We involved both citizens and health care professionals to target the decision aid for citizens with lower EA. This decision aid represents a new way of communicating detailed information and may be able to enhance informed choices about colorectal cancer screening participation among citizens with lower EA.


2019 ◽  
Vol 156 (6) ◽  
pp. S-945-S-946
Author(s):  
Abbinaya Elangovan ◽  
Jacob M. Skeans ◽  
David Kaelber ◽  
Gregory S. Cooper ◽  
Dalbir S. Sandhu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document