Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Factors Associated With Clinician Recommendations for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Average-Risk Patients: Data From a National Survey.
Zhu, Xuan; Weiser, Emily; Jacobson, Debra J; Griffin, Joan M; Limburg, Paul J; Finney Rutten, Lila J.
Affiliation
  • Zhu X; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905-0002. Email: zhu.xuan@mayo.edu.
  • Weiser E; Exact Sciences Corporation, Madison, Wisconsin.
  • Jacobson DJ; Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Griffin JM; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Limburg PJ; Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Finney Rutten LJ; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 19: E19, 2022 04 14.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35420980
INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among average-risk patients is underused in the US. Clinician recommendation is strongly associated with CRC screening completion. To inform interventions that improve CRC screening uptake among average-risk patients, we examined clinicians' routine recommendations of 7 guideline-recommended screening methods and factors associated with these recommendations. METHODS: We conducted an online survey in November and December 2019 among a sample of primary care clinicians (PCCs) and gastroenterologists (GIs) from a panel of US clinicians. Clinicians reported whether they routinely recommend each screening method, screening method intervals, and patient age at which they stop recommending screening. We also measured the influence of various factors on screening recommendations. RESULTS: Nearly all 814 PCCs (99%) and all 159 GIs (100%) reported that they routinely recommend colonoscopy for average-risk patients, followed by stool-based tests (more than two-thirds of PCCs and GIs). Recommendation of other visualization-based methods was less frequent (PCCs, 26%-35%; GIs, 30%-41%). A sizable proportion of clinicians reported guideline-discordant screening intervals and age to stop screening. Guidelines and clinical evidence were most frequently reported as very influential to clinician recommendations. Factors associated with routine recommendation of each screening method included clinician-perceived effectiveness of the method, clinician familiarity with the method, Medicare coverage, clinical capacity, and patient adherence. CONCLUSION: Clinician education is needed to improve knowledge, familiarity, and experience with guideline-recommended screening methods with the goal of effectively engaging patients in informed decision making for CRC screening.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Colorectal Neoplasms / Early Detection of Cancer Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Journal subject: SAUDE PUBLICA Year: 2022 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Colorectal Neoplasms / Early Detection of Cancer Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Journal subject: SAUDE PUBLICA Year: 2022 Type: Article