scholarly journals Primary Care Physicians’ Support of Shared Decision Making for Different Cancer Screening Decisions

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Elston Lafata ◽  
Richard F. Brown ◽  
Michael P. Pignone ◽  
Scott Ratliff ◽  
L. Aubree Shay

Background. Despite its widespread advocacy, shared decision making (SDM) is not routinely used for cancer screening. To better understand the implementation barriers, we describe primary care physicians’ (PCPs’) support for SDM across diverse cancer screening contexts. Methods. Surveys were mailed to a random sample of USA-based PCPs. Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, we tested for associations of PCPs’ support of SDM with the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) assigned recommendation grade, assessed whether the decision pertained to not screening older patients, and the PCPs’ autonomous v. controlled motivation-orientation for using SDM. Results. PCPs (n = 278) were, on average, aged 52 years, 38% female, and 69% white. Of these, 79% endorsed discussing screening benefits as very important to SDM; 64% for discussing risks; and 31% for agreeing with patient’s opinion. PCPs were most likely to rate SDM as very important for colorectal cancer screening in adults aged 50–75 years (69%), and least likely for colorectal cancer screening in adults aged >85 years (34%). Regression results indicated the importance of PCPs’ having autonomous or self-determined reasons for engaging in SDM (e.g., believing in the benefits of SDM) (OR = 2.29, 95% CI, 1.87 to 2.79). PCPs’ support for SDM varied by USPSTF recommendation grade (overall contrast, X2 = 14.7; P = 0.0054), with support greatest for A-Grade recommendations. Support for SDM was lower in contexts where decisions pertained to not screening older patients (OR = 0.45, 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.56). Limitations. It is unknown whether PCPs’ perceptions of the importance of SDM behaviors differs with specific screening decisions or the potential limited ability to generalize findings. Conclusions. Our results highlight the need to document SDM benefits and consider the specific contextual challenges, such as the level of uncertainty or whether evidence supports recommending/not recommending screening, when implementing SDM across an array of cancer screening contexts.

2020 ◽  
Vol 192 (18) ◽  
pp. E484-E484
Author(s):  
Michael Bretthauer ◽  
Lise M. Helsingen ◽  
Mette Kalager ◽  
Per-Olav Vandvik ◽  
Thomas Agoritsas ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 246-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Volk ◽  
Viola B. Leal ◽  
Lianne E. Jacobs ◽  
Andrew M.D. Wolf ◽  
Durado D. Brooks ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 179-179
Author(s):  
Jennifer Elston Lafata ◽  
Richard F. Brown ◽  
Michael P. Pignone ◽  
Scott Ratliff ◽  
Laura Aubree Shay

179 Background: Despite widespread advocacy, shared decision making (SDM) is not routinely used in office-based cancer screening discussions. We describe primary care physicians’ (PCPs) endorsement of the importance of SDM in different cancer screening contexts. Methods: Between 3/15-5/15 we administered a mailed survey to PCPs randomly selected from the American Medical Association’s Master File. Using 5-point Likert scales, we report PCP’s ratings of the importance of SDM for 11 specific screening scenarios graded by the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF), four specific to not screening elderly patients. Multivariable logistic regression, accounting for repeated observations, was used to estimate the association of physicians’ endorsement of SDM as ‘very important’ with (1) USPSTF grade A [highest endorsement] vs. others, and (2) if scenario pertained to not screening among the elderly. The model controlled for physician age, gender, race, specialty, medical school affiliation, practice size, and PCP’s internal/external motivation for SDM. Results: PCPs were on average 52 years of age, 38% female, and 69% white (N = 288). They were most likely to rate SDM as ‘very important’ for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in adults aged 50-75 (69%), and least likely for CRC screening in adults aged > 85 (34%). Model results indicated PCPs were significantly (p < 0.01) more likely to endorse SDM as ‘very important’ for A-grade services compared to others, particularly D-grade services (OR = 0.63), and less likely to do so when decision was not to screen among elderly (OR = 0.45). PCPs with more internal motivation for SDM were more likely to endorse its importance (OR = 2.29), but no other physician characteristic was associated with SDM endorsement. Conclusions: The more PCPs internally value SDM, the more likely they are to endorse it as very important regardless of screening scenario. Yet, PCPs’ endorsement varied by USPSTF grade, being particularly low when screening was not recommended, especially when the decision pertained to screening not recommended among elderly patients.


2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 526-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Schroy ◽  
Emir Duhovic ◽  
Clara A. Chen ◽  
Timothy C. Heeren ◽  
William Lopez ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document