Hereditary colorectal cancer screening: A 10-year longitudinal cohort study following an educational intervention.

Family history (FH) of a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with two to fourfold increased risk, yet screening uptake is suboptimal despite proven mortality reduction. We developed a FH-based CRC Risk Triage/Management tool for family physicians (FPs), and educational booklet for patients with CRC FH. This report describes physician referral and patient screening behavior 5 and 10 years post-educational intervention, and factors associated with screening. Longitudinal cohort study. FPs/patients in Ontario and Newfoundland, Canada were sent questionnaires at baseline (2005), 5 and 10 years (2015) following tool/booklet receipt. FPs were asked about CRC screening, patients about FH, screening type and timing. "Correct" screening was concordance with tool recommendations. Results reported for 29/121 (24%) FPs and 98/297 (33%) patients who completed all 3 questionnaires. Over 10 years 2/3 patients received the correct CRC screening test at appropriate timing (baseline 75%, 5-year 62%, 10-year 65%). About half reported their FP recommended CRC screening (5-year 51%, 10-year 63%). Fewer than half the patients correctly assessed their CRC risk (44%, 40%, 41%). Patients were less likely to have correct screening timing if female (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.61, 0.99; p = 0.045). Patients were less likely to have both correct test and timing if moderate/high CRC risk (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.47, 0.93; p = 0.017) and more likely if their physician recommended screening (RR1.69; 95% CI 1.15, 2.49; p = 0.007). Physician discussion of CRC risk and screening can positively impact patient screening behavior. Efforts are particularly needed for women and patients at moderate/high CRC risk.

Supporting genetics in primary care: investigating how theory can inform professional education.

Evidence indicates that many barriers exist to the integration of genetic case finding into primary care. We conducted an exploratory study of the determinants of three specific behaviours related to using breast cancer genetics referral guidelines effectively: 'taking a family history', 'making a risk assessment', and 'making a referral decision'. We developed vignettes of primary care consultations with hypothetical patients, representing a wide range of genetic risk for which different referral decisions would be appropriate. We used the Theory of Planned Behavior to develop a survey instrument to capture data on behavioural intention and its predictors (attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control) for each of the three behaviours and mailed it to a sample of Canadian family physicians. We used correlation and regression analyses to explore the relationships between predictor and dependent variables. The response rate was 96/125 (77%). The predictor variables explained 38-83% of the variance in intention across the three behaviours. Family physicians' intentions were lower for 'making a risk assessment' (perceived as the most difficult) than for the other two behaviours. We illustrate how understanding psychological factors salient to behaviour can be used to tailor professional educational interventions; for example, considering the approach of behavioural rehearsal to improve confidence in skills (perceived behavioural control), or vicarious reinforcement as where participants are sceptical that genetics is consistent with their role (subjective norm).

GenetiKit: a randomized controlled trial to enhance delivery of genetics services by family physicians.

BACKGROUND: Patients look to their family physicians (FPs) for credible information and guidance in making informed choices about genetic testing. FPs are challenged by lack of knowledge and the rapid pace of genetic discovery. There is an urgent need for effective interventions to facilitate integration of genetics into family medicine. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a multi-faceted knowledge translation intervention would improve skills, including referral decisions, confidence in core genetics competencies and knowledge. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial involving FPs in four communities in Ontario, Canada (two urban and two rural). The intervention consisted of an interactive educational workshop, portfolio of practical clinical genetics tools and knowledge service called Gene Messenger. Outcome measures included appropriate genetics referral decisions in response to 10 breast cancer scenarios, decisional difficulty, self-reported confidence in 11 genetics core competencies, 3 knowledge questions and evaluation of intervention components 6 months afterwards. RESULTS: Among the one hundred and twenty-five FPs randomized, 80 (64%) completed the study (33 control, 47 intervention). Intervention FPs had significantly higher appropriate referral decision scores [6.4/10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.8-6.9] control, 7.8/10 (95% CI 7.4-8.2) intervention] and overall self-reported confidence on core genetics competencies [37.9/55 (95% CI 35.1-40.7) control, 47.0/55 (95% CI 44.9-49.2) intervention]. Over 90% of FPs wanted to continue receiving Gene Messengers and would recommend them to colleagues. No significant differences were found in decisional difficulty or knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that a complex educational intervention was able to significantly improve practice intent for clinical genetics scenarios found in primary care, as well as confidence in genetics skills.

Genetic susceptibility to cancer. Family physicians' experience.

OBJECTIVE: To explore family physicians' experiences in dealing with genetic susceptibility to cancer. DESIGN: Qualitative study using focus groups. SETTING: Four Ontario sites: northern, rural, urban, and inner city. PARTICIPANTS: Forty rural and urban FPs participated in four focus groups: 28 were male; average age was 41. METHOD: Focus groups using a semistructured interview guide were audiotaped and transcribed. The constant comparative method of data analysis was used. Key words and concepts were identified. Data were sorted using NUD*IST software. MAIN FINDINGS: Participants realized the escalating expectations for genetic testing and its effect on family practice. They explored an expanded role for themselves in genetic testing. Possible activities included risk assessment, gatekeeping, and ordering genetic tests. They were concerned about the complexity of genetic testing, the lack of evidence regarding management, and the implications for families. CONCLUSION: We must help FPs struggling to integrate genetics into their practices, by addressing their concerns, enhancing the way they communicate information on genetics, and developing appropriate educational tools.