Strategies for discussing long-term prognosis when deciding on cancer screening for adults over age 75.

BACKGROUND: Consideration of older adults' 10-year prognosis is necessary for high-quality cancer screening decisions. However, few primary care providers (PCPs) discuss long-term (10-year) prognosis with older adults. METHODS: To learn PCPs' and older adults' perspectives on and to develop strategies for discussing long-term prognosis in the context of cancer screening decisions, we conducted qualitative individual interviews with adults 76-89 and focus groups or individual interviews with PCPs. We recruited participants from 4 community and 2 academic Boston-area practices and completed a thematic analysis of participant responses to open-ended questions on discussing long-term prognosis. RESULTS: Forty-five PCPs (21 community-based) participated in 7 focus groups or 7 individual interviews. Thirty patients participated; 19 (63%) were female, 13 (43%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 13 (43%) were non-Hispanic white. Patients and PCPs had varying views on the utility of discussing long-term prognosis. "For some patients and for some families having this information is really helpful," (PCP participant). Some participants felt that prognostic information could be helpful for future planning, whereas others thought the information could be anxiety-provoking or of "no value" because death is unpredictable; still others were unsure about the value of these discussions. Patients often described thinking about their own prognosis. Yet, PCPs described feeling uncomfortable with these conversations. Patients recommended that discussion of long-term prognosis be anchored to clinical decisions, that information be provided on how this information may be useful, and that patient interest in prognosis be assessed before prognostic information is offered. PCPs recommended that scripts be brief. These recommendations were used to develop example scripts to guide these conversations. CONCLUSIONS: We developed scripts and strategies for PCPs to introduce the topic of long-term prognosis with older adults and to provide numerical prognostic information to those interested. Future studies will need to test the effect of these strategies in practice.

Primary Care Providers' Perceptions of the Acceptability, Appropriateness, and Feasibility of a Mammography Decision Aid for Women Aged 75 and Older.

Background. Clinicians need to find decision aids (DAs) useful for their successful implementation. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an exploratory study to learn primary care clinicians' (PCPs) perspectives on a mammography DA for women ≥75 to inform its implementation. Methods. We sent a cross-sectional survey to 135 PCPs whose patients had participated in a randomized trial of the DA. These PCPs practiced at 1 of 11 practices in Massachusetts or North Carolina. PCPs were asked closed-ended and open-ended questions on shared decision making (SDM) around mammography with women ≥75 and on the DA's acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Results. Eighty PCPs participated (24 [30%] from North Carolina). Most (n = 69, 86%) thought that SDM about mammography with women ≥75 was extremely/very important and that they engaged women ≥75 in SDM around mammography frequently/always (n = 49, 61%). Regarding DA acceptability, 60% felt the DA was too long. Regarding appropriateness, 70 (89%) thought it was somewhat/very helpful and that it would help patients make more informed decisions; 55 (70%) would recommend it. Few (n = 6, 8%) felt they had other resources to support this decision. Regarding feasibility, 53 (n = 67%) thought it would be most feasible for patients to receive the DA before a visit from medical assistants rather than during or after a visit or from health educators. Most (n = 62, 78%) wanted some training to use the DA. Limitations. Sixty-nine percent of PCPs in this small study practiced in academic settings. Conclusions. Although PCPs were concerned about the DA's length, most found it helpful and informative and felt it would be feasible for medical assistants to deliver the DA before a visit. Implications. Study findings may inform implementation of this and other DAs.

A Strategy to Prepare Primary Care Clinicians for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening With Adults Older Than 75 Years.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adults older than 75 years are overscreened for cancer, especially those with less than 10-year life expectancy. This study aimed to learn the effects of providing primary care providers (PCPs) with scripts for discussing stopping mammography and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and with information on patient's 10-year life expectancy on their patients' intentions to be screened for these cancers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patient participants, identified via PCP appointment logs, completed a questionnaire pre- and postvisit. Primary care providers were given scripts for discussing stopping screening and information on patient's 10-year life expectancy before these visits. Primary care providers completed a questionnaire at the end of the study. Patients and PCPs were asked about discussing stopping cancer screening and patient life expectancy. Patient screening intentions (1-15 Likert scale; lower scores suggest lower intentions) were compared pre- and postvisit using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Ninety patients older than 75 years (47% of eligible patients reached by phone) from 45 PCPs participated. Patient mean age was 80.0 years (SD = 2.9), 43 (48%) were female, and mean life expectancy was 9.7 years (SD = 2.4). Thirty-seven PCPs (12 community-based) completed a questionnaire. Primary care providers found the scripts helpful (32 [89%]) and thought they would use them frequently (29 [81%]). Primary care providers also found patient life expectancy information helpful (35 [97%]). However, only 8 PCPs (22%) reported feeling comfortable discussing patient life expectancy. Patients' intentions to undergo CRC screening (9.0 [SD = 5.3] to 6.5 [SD = 6.0], p < .0001) and mammography screening (12.9 [SD = 3.0] to 11.7 [SD = 4.9], p = .08) decreased from pre- to postvisit (significantly for CRC). Sixty-three percent of patients (54/86) were interested in discussing life expectancy with their PCP previsit and 56% (47/84) postvisit. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: PCPs found scripts for discussing stopping cancer screening and information on patient life expectancy helpful. Possibly, as a result, their patients older than 75 years had lower intentions of being screened for CRC. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03480282.

Effect of a Mammography Screening Decision Aid for Women 75 Years and Older: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Guidelines recommend that women 75 years and older be informed of the benefits and harms of mammography before screening. Objective: To test the effects of receipt of a paper-based mammography screening decision aid (DA) for women 75 years and older on their screening decisions. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster randomized clinical trial with clinician as the unit of randomization. All analyses were completed on an intent-to-treat basis. The setting was 11 primary care practices in Massachusetts or North Carolina. Of 1247 eligible women reached, 546 aged 75 to 89 years without breast cancer or dementia who had a mammogram within 24 months but not within 6 months and saw 1 of 137 clinicians (herein referred to as PCPs) from November 3, 2014, to January 26, 2017, participated. A research assistant (RA) administered a previsit questionnaire on each participant's health, breast cancer risk factors, sociodemographic characteristics, and screening intentions. After the visit, the RA administered a postvisit questionnaire on screening intentions and knowledge. Interventions: Receipt of the DA (DA arm) or a home safety (HS) pamphlet (control arm) before a PCP visit. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants were followed up for 18 months for receipt of mammography screening (primary outcome). To examine the effects of the DA, marginal logistic regression models were fit using generalized estimating equations to allow for clustering by PCP. Adjusted probabilities and risk differences were estimated to account for clustering by PCP. Results: Of 546 women in the study, 283 (51.8%) received the DA. Patients in each arm were well matched; their mean (SD) age was 79.8 (3.7) years, 428 (78.4%) were non-Hispanic white, 321 (of 543 [59.1%]) had completed college, and 192 (35.2%) had less than a 10-year life expectancy. After 18 months, 9.1% (95% CI, 1.2%-16.9%) fewer women in the DA arm than in the control arm had undergone mammography screening (51.3% vs 60.4%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95; P = .006). Women in the DA arm were more likely than those in the control arm to rate their screening intentions lower from previsit to postvisit (69 of 283 [adjusted %, 24.5%] vs 47 of 263 [adjusted %, 15.3%]), to be more knowledgeable about the benefits and harms of screening (86 [adjusted %, 25.5%] vs 32 [adjusted %, 11.7%]), and to have a documented discussion about mammography with their PCP (146 [adjusted %, 47.4%] vs 111 [adjusted %, 38.9%]). Almost all women in the DA arm (94.9%) would recommend the DA. Conclusions and Relevance: Providing women 75 years and older with a mammography screening DA before a PCP visit helps them make more informed screening decisions and leads to fewer women choosing to be screened, suggesting that the DA may help reduce overscreening. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02198690.

Scripts and Strategies for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening with Adults > 75 Years: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines recommending not to continue cancer screening for adults > 75 years old, especially those with short life expectancy, primary care providers (PCPs) feel ill-prepared to discuss stopping screening with older adults. OBJECTIVE: To develop scripts and strategies for PCPs to use to discuss stopping cancer screening with adults > 75. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interview guides to conduct individual interviews with adults > 75 years old and focus groups and/or individual interviews with PCPs. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five PCPs and 30 patients > 75 years old participated from six community or academic Boston-area primary care practices. APPROACH: Participants were asked their thoughts on discussions around stopping cancer screening and to provide feedback on scripts that were iteratively revised for PCPs to use when discussing stopping mammography and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. RESULTS: Twenty-one (47%) of the 45 PCPs were community based. Nineteen (63%) of the 30 patients were female, and 13 (43%) were non-Hispanic white. PCPs reported using different approaches to discuss stopping cancer screening depending on the clinical scenario. PCPs noted it was easier to discuss stopping screening when the harms of screening clearly outweighed the benefits for a patient. In these cases, PCPs felt more comfortable being more directive. When the balance between the benefits and harms of screening was less clear, PCPs endorsed shared decision-making but found this approach more challenging because it was difficult to explain why to stop screening. While patients were generally enthusiastic about screening, they also reported not wanting to undergo tests of little value and said they would stop screening if their PCP recommended it. By the end of participant interviews, no further edits were recommended to the scripts. CONCLUSIONS: To increase PCP comfort and capability to discuss stopping cancer screening with older adults, we developed scripts and strategies that PCPs may use for discussing stopping cancer screening.

Hospital Transfer Rates Among US Nursing Home Residents With Advanced Illness Before and After Initiatives to Reduce Hospitalizations.

Importance: Hospital transfers among nursing home residents in the United States who have been diagnosed with advanced illnesses and have limited life expectancy are often burdensome, costly, and of little clinical benefit. National initiatives, introduced since 2012, have focused on reducing such hospitalizations, but little is known about the consequences of these initiatives in this population. Objective: To investigate the change in hospital transfer rates among nursing home residents with advanced illnesses, such as dementia, congestive heart failure (CHF), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), from 2011 to 2017-before and after the introduction of national initiatives to reduce hospitalizations. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, nationwide Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016 (with the follow-up for transfer rates until December 31, 2017), were used to identify annual inception cohorts of long-stay (>100 days) nursing home residents who had recently progressed to the advanced stages of dementia, CHF, or COPD. The data were analyzed from October 24, 2018, to October 3, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of hospital transfers (hospitalizations, observation stays, and emergency department visits) per person-year alive was calculated from the MDS assessment from the date when residents first met the criteria for advanced illness up to 12 months afterward using Medicare claims from 2011 to 2017. Transfer rates for all causes, potentially avoidable conditions (sepsis, pneumonia, dehydration, urinary tract infections, CHF, and COPD), and serious bone fractures (pelvis, hip, wrist, ankle, and long bones of arms or legs) were investigated. Hospice enrollment and mortality were also ascertained. Results: The proportions of residents in the 2011 and 2016 cohorts who underwent any hospital transfer were 56.1% and 45.4% of those with advanced dementia, 77.6% and 69.5% of those with CHF, and 76.2% and 67.2% of those with COPD. The mean (SD) number of transfers per person-year alive for potentially avoidable conditions was higher in the 2011 cohort vs 2016 cohort: advanced dementia, 2.4 (14.0) vs 1.6 (11.2) (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.81); CHF, 8.5 (32.0) vs 6.7 (26.8) (aRR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.81); and COPD, 7.8 (30.9) vs 5.5 (24.8) (aRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.57-0.72). Transfers for bone fractures remained unchanged, and mortality did not increase. Hospice enrollment was low across all illness groups and years (range, 23%-30%). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that concurrent with new initiatives aimed at reducing hospitalizations, hospital transfers declined between 2011 and 2017 among nursing home residents with advanced illnesses without increased mortality rates. Opportunities remain to further reduce unnecessary hospital transfers in this population and improve goal-directed care for those residents who opt to forgo hospitalization.

Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery: Do Clinical and Behavioral Factors Explain Racial Differences?

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested less weight loss among African American compared to Caucasian patients; however, few studies have been able to simultaneously account for baseline differences in other demographic, clinical, or behavioral factors. METHODS: We interviewed patients at two weight loss surgery (WLS) centers and conducted chart reviews before and after WLS. We compared weight loss post-WLS by race/ethnicity and examined baseline demographic, clinical (BMI, comorbidities, quality of life), and behavioral (eating behavior, physical activity level, alcohol intake) factors that might explain observed racial differences in weight loss at 1 and 2 years after WLS. RESULTS: Of 537 participants who underwent either Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (54%) or gastric banding (46%), 85% completed 1-year follow-up and 73% completed 2-year follow-up. Patients lost a mean of 33.00% of initial weight at year 1 and 32.43% at year 2 after bypass and 16.07% and 17.56 % respectively after banding. After adjustment for other demographic characteristics and type of surgery, African Americans lost an absolute 5.93 ± 1.49% less weight than Caucasian patients after bypass (p < 0.001) and 4.72 ± 1.96% less weight after banding. Of the other demographic, clinical, behavioral factors considered, having diabetes and perceived difficulty making dietary changes at baseline were associated with less weight loss among gastric bypass patients whereas having a diagnosis of anxiety disorder was associated with less weight loss among gastric banding patients. The association between race and weight loss did not substantially attenuate with additional adjustment for these clinical and behavioral factors, however. CONCLUSION: African American patients lost significantly less weight than Caucasian patients. Racial differences could not be explained by baseline demographic, clinical, or behavioral characteristics we examined.