RESUMEN
Importance: Most of the rapid increase in cutaneous melanoma incidence in the US has been localized disease that is treated surgically and is associated with high survival rates. However, little is known about the psychological well-being of survivors in the US. Objective: To explore the lived experiences and fear of cancer recurrence among survivors of localized cutaneous melanoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a qualitative and survey-based study that used semistructured interviews and the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory short form (FCRI-SF) survey tool with participants recruited from an academic dermatology practice affiliated with the University of Texas, Austin. Interviews were completed via telephone or in person from August 2021 to September 2022. Each of the 9 items in the FCRI-SF was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, scored from 0 to 4, with a maximum possible score of 36 points. Data analyses were performed from February 2022 to June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Semistructured interviews were analyzed for themes and subthemes associated with the lived experiences of survivors of cutaneous melanoma. The FCRI-SF scores were tabulated, with scores of 13 or greater identifying potential cases of clinically significant fear of cancer recurrence. Results: In all, 51 participants (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [11.7] years; 34 [67%] female and 17 [33%] male) with a history of localized melanoma (stage 0-IIA) completed the interview and survey. Among them, 17 (33%) had survived a diagnosis of stage 0 melanoma, and the remainder, at least 1 invasive melanoma diagnosis (stage I-IIA). Semistructured interviews revealed several themes: (1) emotions surrounding follow-up appointments, (2) intensity of melanoma surveillance, (3) lifestyle changes regarding sun exposure, and (4) thoughts about life and death. Thirty-eight of 51 participants had an FCRI-SF score above the threshold for clinical fear of cancer recurrence. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative and survey-based study found that despite having an excellent prognosis, some survivors of localized melanoma, even those who had stage 0, have high rates of fear of cancer recurrence and intense survivorship experiences that affect their psychological well-being.
Asunto(s)
Supervivientes de Cáncer , Miedo , Melanoma , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Melanoma/psicología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/psicología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Masculino , Femenino , Miedo/psicología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/psicología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Supervivientes de Cáncer/psicología , Adulto , Anciano , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Investigación Cualitativa , Calidad de Vida , Melanoma Cutáneo Maligno , Entrevistas como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous studies of hospital-based patients with metastatic melanoma suggest sociodemographic factors, including insurance type, may be associated with the receipt of systemic treatments. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether insurance type is associated with the receipt of systemic treatment among patients with melanoma in a broad cohort of patients in North Carolina. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study between 2011 and 2017 of patients with stages III-IV melanoma using data from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry linked to Medicare, Medicaid, and private health insurance claims across the state. The primary outcome was the receipt of any systemic treatment, and the secondary outcome was the receipt of immunotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 372 patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 68 years old (interquartile range: 56-76) and 61% were male. Within the cohort 48% had Medicare only, 29% had private insurance, 12% had both Medicare and Medicaid, and 11% had Medicaid only. A total of 186 (50%) patients received systemic treatment for melanoma, 125 (67%) of whom received immunotherapy. The use of systemic therapy, including immunotherapy, increased significantly over time. Having Medicaid-only insurance was independently associated with a 45% lower likelihood of receiving any systemic treatment [0.55 (95% CI: 0.35, 0.85)] and a 43% lower likelihood of receipt of immunotherapy [0.57 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.95)] compared with private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Stage III-IV melanoma patients with Medicaid-only insurance were less likely to receive systemic therapy or immunotherapy than patients with private insurance or Medicare insurance. This finding raises concerns about insurance-based disparities in treatment access.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , Melanoma , Humanos , Masculino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Femenino , North Carolina , Estudios Retrospectivos , Seguro de Salud , Medicaid , Melanoma/terapia , Melanoma Cutáneo MalignoRESUMEN
Importance: The incidence of melanoma in situ (MIS) is increasing more rapidly than any invasive or in situ cancer in the US. Although more than half of melanomas diagnosed are MIS, information about long-term prognosis following a diagnosis of MIS remains unknown. Objective: To evaluate mortality and factors associated with mortality after a diagnosis of MIS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study of adults with a diagnosis of first primary MIS from 2000 to 2018 included data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, which were analyzed from July to September 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality after a diagnosis of MIS was evaluated using 15-year melanoma-specific survival, 15-year relative survival (ie, compared with similar individuals without MIS), and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs). Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for death by demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: Among 137â¯872 patients with a first-and-only MIS, the mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 61.9 (16.5) years (64â¯027 women [46.4%]; 239 [0.2%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 606 [0.4%] Asian, 344 [0.2%] Black, 3348 [2.4%] Hispanic, and 133â¯335 [96.7%] White individuals). Mean (range) follow-up was 6.6 (0-18.9) years. The 15-year melanoma-specific survival was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.3%-98.5%), whereas the 15-year relative survival was 112.4% (95% CI, 112.0%-112.8%). The melanoma-specific SMR was 1.89 (95% CI, 1.77-2.02); however, the all-cause SMR was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.67-0.7). Risk of melanoma-specific mortality was higher for older patients (7.4% for those 80 years or older vs 1.4% for those aged 60-69 years; adjusted HR, 8.2; 95% CI, 6.7-10.0) and patients with acral lentiginous histology results (3.3% for acral lentiginous vs 0.9% for superficial spreading; HR, 5.3; 95% CI, 2.3-12.3). Of patients with primary MIS, 6751 (4.3%) experienced a second primary invasive melanoma and 11â¯628 (7.4%) experienced a second primary MIS. Compared with patients without a subsequent melanoma, the risk of melanoma-specific mortality was increased for those with a second primary invasive melanoma (adjusted HR, 4.1; 95% CI, 3.6-4.6) and was decreased for those with a second primary MIS (adjusted HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). Conclusions and relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that patients with a diagnosis of MIS have an increased but low risk of melanoma-specific mortality and live longer than people in the general population, suggesting that there is significant detection of low-risk disease among health-seeking individuals. Factors associated with death following MIS include older age (≥80 years) and subsequent primary invasive melanoma.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Estudios de Cohortes , Melanoma/epidemiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/epidemiología , Pronóstico , Melanoma Cutáneo MalignoAsunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias , Humanos , Sistemas de Información Geográfica , TexasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hispanic populations in the United States experience numerous barriers to care access. It is unclear how cancer screening disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals are explained by access to care, including having a usual source of care and health insurance coverage. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2019 National Health Interview Survey was conducted and included respondents who were sex- and age-eligible for cervical (n = 8316), breast (n = 6025), or colorectal cancer screening (n = 11,313). The proportion of ever screened and up to date for each screening type was compared. Regression models evaluated whether controlling for reporting a usual source of care and type of health insurance (public, private, none) attenuated disparities between Hispanics and non-Hispanic White individuals. RESULTS: Hispanic individuals were less likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to be up to date with cervical cancer screening (71.6% vs. 74.6%) and colorectal cancer screening (52.9% vs. 70.3%), but up-to-date screening was similar for breast cancer (78.8% vs. 76.3%). Hispanic individuals (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to have a usual source of care (77.9% vs. 86.0%) and more likely to be uninsured (23.6% vs. 7.1%). In regressions, insurance fully attenuated cervical cancer disparities. Controlling for both usual source of care and insurance type explained approximately half of the colorectal cancer screening disparities (adjusted risk difference: -8.3 [-11.2 to -4.8]). CONCLUSION: Addressing the high rate of uninsurance among Hispanic individuals could mitigate cancer screening disparities. Future research should build on the relative successes of breast cancer screening and investigate additional barriers for colorectal cancer screening. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study uses data from a national survey to compare cancer screening use those who identify as Hispanic with those who identify as non-Hispanic White. Those who identify as Hispanic are much less likely to be up to date with colorectal cancer screening than those who identify as non-Hispanic White, slightly less likely to be up to date on cervical cancer screening, and similarly likely to receive breast cancer screening. Improving insurance coverage is important for health equity, as is further exploring what drives higher use of breast cancer screening and lower use of colorectal cancer screening.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Hispánicos o Latinos , Neoplasias , Blanco , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/economía , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/etnología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/etnología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/economía , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hispánicos o Latinos/estadística & datos numéricos , Cobertura del Seguro/economía , Cobertura del Seguro/estadística & datos numéricos , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/economía , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/etnología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/economía , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/epidemiología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/etnología , Blanco/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Little is known about how the quality of decisions influences patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We hypothesized that higher decision quality for breast reconstruction would be independently associated with better PROs. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing mastectomy with or without reconstruction. Patients were enrolled before surgery and followed for 18 months. We used BREAST-Q scales to measure PROs and linear regression models to explore the relationship between decision quality (based on knowledge and preference concordance) and PROs. Final models were adjusted for baseline BREAST-Q score, radiation, chemotherapy, and major complications. RESULTS: The cohort included 101 patients who completed baseline and 18-month surveys. Breast reconstruction was independently associated with higher satisfaction with breasts (ß = 20.2, p = 0.0002), psychosocial well-being (ß = 14.4, p = 0.006), and sexual well-being (ß = 15.7, p = 0.007), but not physical well-being. Patients who made a high-quality decision had similar PROs as patients who did not. Among patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, higher decision quality was associated with lower psychosocial well-being (ß = -14.2, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Breast reconstruction was associated with better PROs in some but not all domains. Overall, making a high-quality decision was not associated with better PROs. However, patients who did not have reconstruction had a trend toward better well-being after making a high-quality decision, whereas patients who did have reconstruction had poorer well-being after making a high-quality decision. Additional research on the relationship between decision quality and PROs is needed.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Mamoplastia , Humanos , Femenino , Mastectomía/psicología , Estudios Prospectivos , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Satisfacción del Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Mamoplastia/psicología , Medición de Resultados Informados por el PacienteRESUMEN
Background Among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and an elevated stroke risk, guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for stroke prevention. Changes in DOAC use over the past decade have not been well described. Methods and Results We evaluated trends in use of DOACs and warfarin from 2011 to 2020 among adults with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 based on electronic health record data from 88 health systems in the United States contributing to Cerner Real World Data. The use of DOACs and warfarin was described over time, by age, sex, race, and ethnicity, and at the health-system level. We identified 436 864 patients with AF at risk for stroke (median age, 78 years; 52.1% men). From 2011 to 2020, overall anticoagulation rates increased from 56.3% to 64.7%, as DOAC use increased steadily (from 4.7% to 47.9%), while warfarin use declined (from 52.4% to 17.7%). DOAC uptake was similar across age, sex, and race and ethnicity groups but varied by health system. In 2020, the median health-system-level proportion of patients with AF on a DOAC was 49% (interquartile range, 40%-54%). Conclusions Over the past decade, anticoagulation rates for patients with AF have increased modestly as DOACs largely replaced warfarin, though significant gaps remain: One in 3 high-risk patients with AF is not on any anticoagulant. While DOAC adoption was generally consistent across major demographic groups, use between health systems remained highly variable, suggesting that provider and system factors influence DOAC uptake use more than patient-level factors.
Asunto(s)
Fibrilación Atrial , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Anciano , Femenino , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Fibrilación Atrial/epidemiología , Warfarina/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & controlAsunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Humanos , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
Background. In mid-2020, there was significant concern that the overlapping 2020-2021 influenza season and COVID-19 pandemic would overwhelm already stressed health care systems in the Northern Hemisphere, particularly if influenza immunization rates were low. Methods. Using a mathematical susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered (SEIR) compartmental model incorporating the age-specific viral transmission rates and disease severity of Austin, Texas, a large metropolitan region, we projected the incidence and health care burden for both COVID-19 and influenza across observed levels of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and influenza immunization rates for the 2020-2021 season. We then retrospectively compared scenario projections made in August 2020 with observed trends through June 2021. Results. Across all scenarios, we projected that the COVID-19 burden would dwarf that of influenza. In all but our lowest transmission scenarios, intensive care units were overwhelmed by COVID-19 patients, with the levels of influenza immunization having little impact on health care capacity needs. Consistent with our projections, sustained nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in Austin prevented COVID-19 from overwhelming health care systems and almost completely suppressed influenza during the 2020-2021 respiratory virus season. Limitations. The model assumed no cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, which might reduce the burden or slow the transmission of 1 or both viruses. Conclusion. Before the widespread rollout of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, COVID-19 was projected to cause an order of magnitude more hospitalizations than seasonal influenza because of its higher transmissibility and severity. Consistent with predictions assuming strong NPIs, COVID-19 strained but did not overwhelm local health care systems in Austin, while the influenza burden was negligible. Implications. Nonspecific NPI efforts can dramatically reduce seasonal influenza burden and preserve health care capacity during respiratory virus season. Highlights: As the COVID-19 pandemic threatened lives worldwide, the Northern Hemisphere braced for a potential "twindemic" of seasonal influenza and COVID-19.Using a validated mathematical model of influenza and SARS-CoV-2 co-circulation in a large US city, we projected the impact of COVID-19-driven nonpharmaceutical interventions combined with influenza vaccination on health care capacity during the 2020-2021 respiratory virus season.We describe analyses conducted during summer 2020 to help US cities prepare for the 2020-2021 influenza season and provide a retrospective evaluation of the initial projections.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Social media platforms such as Twitter are extensively used to communicate about cancer care, yet little is known about the role of these online platforms in promoting early detection or sharing the lived experiences of patients with CRC. This study tracked Twitter discussions about CRC and characterized participating users to better understand public communication and perceptions of CRC during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Tweets containing references to CRC were collected from January 2020 to April 2021 using Twitter's Application Programming Interface. Account metadata was used to predict user demographic information and classify users as either organizations, individuals, clinicians, or influencers. We compared the number of impressions across users and analyzed the content of tweets using natural language processing models to identify prominent topics of discussion. RESULTS: There were 72,229 unique CRC-related tweets by 31,170 users. Most users were male (66%) and older than 40 years (57%). Individuals accounted for most users (44%); organizations (35%); clinicians (19%); and influencers (2%). Influencers made the most median impressions (35,853). Organizations made the most overall impressions (1,067,189,613). Tweets contained the following topics: bereavement (20%), appeals for early detection (20%), research (17%), National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month (15%), screening access (14%), and risk factors (14%). CONCLUSION: Discussions about CRC largely focused on bereavement and early detection. Online coverage of National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month and personal experiences with CRC effectively stimulated goal-oriented tweets about early detection. Our findings suggest that although Twitter is commonly used for communicating about CRC, partnering with influencers may be an effective strategy for improving communication of future public health recommendations related to CRC.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Medios de Comunicación Sociales , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine if a decision aid improves knowledge of lung cancer screening benefits and harms and which benefits and harms are most valued. DESIGN: Pre-post study. SETTING: Online. PARTICIPANTS: 219 current or former (quit within the previous 15 years) smokers ages 55-80 with at least 30 pack-years of smoking. INTERVENTION: Lung cancer screening video decision aid. MAIN MEASURES: Screening knowledge tested by 10 pre-post questions and value of benefits and harms (reducing chance of death from lung cancer, risk of being diagnosed, false positives, biopsies, complications of biopsies and out-of-pocket costs) assessed through rating (1-5 scale) and ranking (top three ranked). RESULTS: Mean age was 64.7±6.1, 42.5% were male, 75.4% white, 48.4% married, 28.9% with less than a college degree and 67.6% with income Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer
, Neoplasias Pulmonares
, Anciano
, Anciano de 80 o más Años
, Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión
, Humanos
, Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico
, Masculino
, Tamizaje Masivo
, Persona de Mediana Edad
, Fumadores
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce morbidity and mortality; however, important disparities exist in CRC uptake. Our study examines the associations of distance to care and frequency of using primary care and screening. METHODS: To examine the distribution of screening geographically and according to several demographic features, we used individual patient-level data, dated September 30, 2018, from a large urban safety-net health system in Central Texas. We used spatial cluster analysis and logistic regression adjusted for age, race, sex, socioeconomic status, and health insurance status. RESULTS: We obtained screening status data for 13,079 age-eligible patients from the health system's electronic medical records. Of those eligible, 55.1% were female, and 55.9% identified as Hispanic. Mean age was 58.1 years. Patients residing more than 20 miles from one of the system's primary care clinics was associated with lower screening rates (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.93). Patients with higher screening rates included those who had a greater number of primary care-related (nonspecialty) visits within 1 year (OR, 6.90; 95% CI, 6.04-7.88) and those who were part of the county-level medical assistance program (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.40-1.84). Spatial analysis identified an area where the level of CRC screening was particularly low. CONCLUSION: Distance to primary care and use of primary care were associated with screening. Priorities in targeted interventions should include identifying and inviting patients with limited care engagements.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Femenino , Hispánicos o Latinos , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Texas/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Surgical excision is important for melanoma treatment. Delays in surgical excision after diagnosis of melanoma have been linked to decreased survival in hospital-based cohorts. This study was aimed at quantifying the association between the timeliness of surgical excision and overall survival in patients diagnosed with melanoma in hospital- and non-hospital-based settings, using a retrospective cohort study of patients with stage 0-III melanoma and using data linked between the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry to Medicare, Medicaid, and private health insurance plan claims across the state. We identified 6,496 patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2012 with follow-up through 2017. We categorized the time from diagnostic biopsy to surgical excision as < 6 weeks after diagnosis, 6 weeks to 90 days after diagnosis, and > 90 days after melanoma diagnosis. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate differences in survival probabilities. Five-year overall survival was lower for those with time to surgery over 90 days (78.6%) compared with those with less than 6 weeks (86%). This difference appeared greater for patients with Stage 1 melanoma. This study was retrospective, included one state, and could not assess melanoma specific mortality. Surgical timeliness may have an effect on overall survival in patients with melanoma. Timely surgery should be encouraged.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones Oncológicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Melanoma/cirugía , Neoplasias Cutáneas/cirugía , Tiempo de Tratamiento/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Biopsia , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Melanoma/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , North Carolina/epidemiología , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Systematic screening skin examination has been proposed to reduce melanoma-related mortality. OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential effectiveness of screening, in a demographic at high risk of melanoma mortality. DESIGN: A cohort Markov state-transition model was developed comparing systematic screening versus usual care (no systematic screening). In the base case, we evaluated a sensitivity and specificity of 20% and 85%, respectively, for usual care (incidental detection) and 50% sensitivity and 85% specificity from systematic screening. We examined a wide range of values in sensitivity analyses. PARTICIPANTS: Potential screening strategies applied to a hypothetical population of 10,000 white men from ages 50-75. MAIN MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, measured in cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY). KEY RESULTS: Using base case assumptions, screening every 2 years beginning at age 60 reduced melanoma mortality by 20% with a cost-utility of $26,503 per QALY gained. Screening every 2 years beginning at age 50 reduced mortality by 30% with an incremental cost-utility of $67,970 per QALY. Results were sensitive to differences in accuracy of systematic screening versus usual care, and costs of screening, but were generally insensitive to costs of biopsy or treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming moderate differences in accuracy with systematic screening versus usual care, screening for melanoma every 2 years starting at age 50 or 60 may be cost-effective in white men. Results are sensitive to degree of difference in sensitivity with screening compared to usual care. Better studies of the accuracy of systematic screening exams compared with usual care are required to determine whether a trial of screening should be undertaken.
Asunto(s)
Tamizaje Masivo , Melanoma , Anciano , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Masculino , Cadenas de Markov , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadAsunto(s)
Seguro de Costos Compartidos/legislación & jurisprudencia , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/estadística & datos numéricos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/economía , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/legislación & jurisprudencia , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Implementación de Plan de Salud , Política de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Illinois , Tamizaje Masivo/legislación & jurisprudencia , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Uso Excesivo de los Servicios de Salud/economía , Uso Excesivo de los Servicios de Salud/prevención & control , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economía , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislación & jurisprudencia , Neoplasias Cutáneas/economíaRESUMEN
Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) reduces mortality, yet more than one third of age-eligible Americans are unscreened. Objective: To examine the effect of a digital health intervention, Mobile Patient Technology for Health-CRC (mPATH-CRC), on rates of CRC screening. Design: Randomized clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02088333). Setting: 6 community-based primary care practices. Participants: 450 patients (223 in the mPATH-CRC group and 227 in usual care) scheduled for a primary care visit and due for routine CRC screening. Intervention: An iPad application that displays a CRC screening decision aid, lets patients order their own screening tests, and sends automated follow-up electronic messages to support patients. Measurements: The primary outcome was chart-verified completion of CRC screening within 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes were ability to state a screening preference, intention to receive screening, screening discussions, and orders for screening tests. All outcome assessors were blinded to randomization. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups; 37% of participants had limited health literacy, and 53% had annual incomes less than $20 000. Screening was completed by 30% of mPATH-CRC participants and 15% of those receiving usual care (logistic regression odds ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.6 to 4.0]). Compared with usual care, more mPATH-CRC participants could state a screening preference, planned to be screened within 6 months, discussed screening with their provider, and had a screening test ordered. Half of mPATH-CRC participants (53%; 118 of 223) "self-ordered" a test via the program. Limitation: Participants were English speakers in a single health care system. Conclusion: A digital health intervention that allows patients to self-order tests can increase CRC screening. Future research should identify methods for implementing similar interventions in clinical care. Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Aplicaciones Móviles , Poblaciones Vulnerables , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Atención Primaria de Salud , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued recommendations for older, heavy lifetime smokers to complete annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans of the chest as screening for lung cancer. The USPSTF recommends and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services require shared decision making using a decision aid for lung cancer screening with annual LDCT. Little is known about how decision aids affect screening knowledge, preferences, and behavior. Thus, we tested a lung cancer screening decision aid video in screening-eligible primary care patients. METHODS: We conducted a single-group study with surveys before and after decision aid viewing and medical record review at 3 months. Participants were active patients of a large US academic primary care practice who were current or former smokers, ages 55-80 years, and eligible for screening based on current screening guidelines. Outcomes assessed pre-post decision aid viewing were screening-related knowledge score (9 items about screening-related harms of false positives and overdiagnosis, likelihood of benefit; score range = 0-9) and preference (preferred screening vs. not). Screening behavior measures, assessed via chart review, included provider visits, screening discussion, LDCT ordering, and LDCT completion within 3 months. RESULTS: Among 50 participants, knowledge increased from pre- to post-decision aid viewing (mean = 2.6 vs. 5.5, difference = 2.8; 95% CI 2.1, 3.6, p < 0.001). Preferences across the overall sample remained similar such that 54% preferred screening at baseline and 50% after viewing; however, 28% of participants changed their preference (to or away from screening) from baseline to after viewing. We assessed screening behavior for 36 participants who had a primary care visit during the 3-month period following enrollment. Eighteen of 36 preferred screening after decision aid viewing. Of these 18, 10 discussed screening, 8 had a test ordered, and 6 completed LDCT. Among the 18 who preferred no screening, 7 discussed screening, 5 had a test ordered, and 4 completed LDCT. CONCLUSIONS: In primary care patients, a lung cancer screening decision aid improved knowledge regarding screening-related benefits and harms. Screening preferences and behavior were heterogeneous. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov . NCT03077230 (registered retrospectively,November 22, 2016).