Do physician recommendations for colorectal cancer screening differ by patient age?

Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie (Impact Factor: 1.97). 08/2007; 21(7):435-8.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Colorectal cancer screening is underutilized, resulting in preventable morbidity and mortality. In the present study, age-related and other disparities associated with physicians' delivery of colorectal cancer screening recommendations were examined. The present cross-sectional study included 43 physicians and 618 of their patients, aged 50 to 80 years, without past or present colorectal cancer. Of the 285 screen-eligible patients, 45% received a recommendation. Multivariate analyses revealed that, compared with younger nondepressed patients, older depressed patients were less likely to receive fecal occult blood test recommendations, compared with no recommendation (OR=0.31, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.02), as well as less likely to receive colonoscopy recommendations, compared with no recommendation (OR=0.14; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.66). Comorbidity and marital status were associated with delivery of fecal occult blood test and colonoscopy recommendations, respectively, compared with no recommendation. In summary, patient age and other characteristics appeared to influence physicians' delivery of colorectal cancer screening and choice of modality.


Available from: Martin Dawes, Jun 13, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with poor numeracy skills may have difficulty participating in shared-decision making, affecting their utilization of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We explored the relationship between numeracy, provider communication, and CRC screening. Data were from the 2007 National Cancer Institute Health Information Trends Survey. Individuals age 50 years or older responded via mail or phone to items measuring numeracy, perceptions of provider communication quality, and CRC screening. After accounting for national sampling weights, multivariate logistic regression models examined the association between these factors. A total of 1,436 subjects responded to an objective numeracy item via mail, and 3,286 responded to a subjective numeracy item via mail or phone; 22.6% had low objective numeracy, and 39.4% had low subjective numeracy. Low subjective numeracy was associated with a lower likelihood of perceiving high quality provider communication (OR 0.63-0.73), but for low objective numeracy, the opposite was observed (OR 1.51-1.64). Low objective or subjective numeracy was associated with less CRC screening. There was significant interaction between subjective numeracy, perceptions of provider communication, and CRC screening. Patient numeracy is associated with perceptions of provider communication quality. For individuals with low subjective numeracy, perceiving high quality communication offset the association between low numeracy and underutilization of CRC screening.
    Journal of Health Communication 12/2010; 15 Suppl 3:157-68. DOI:10.1080/10810730.2010.522699 · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objectives. Physician recommendation is a strong predictor of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence, but there are no sufficient data specific to primary colonoscopy screening programs. The primary objective was to compare the effect of primary care physician's (PCP) counseling with information leaflet about CRC screening on participation rate in opportunistic primary colonoscopy screening program. Secondary objective was to determine the impact of this counseling on a decision to choose unsedated colonoscopy. Material and methods. Six hundred consecutive subjects 50-65 years of age visiting PCP group practice for routine medical consultation were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio either to discuss CRC screening with PCP or to receive an information leaflet on CRC screening only. The outcome measures were the participation rate and the proportion of unsedated colonoscopies assessed on subjects' self-reports collected six months after the intervention. Multivariate logistic regression model with backward selection was used to investigate the association between independent covariates and binary endpoints. Results. Participation rate was 47.0% (141 subjects) in the counseling group and 13.7% (41 patients) in the information leaflet group. The rates of unsedated colonoscopies were 77.0% and 39.0%, respectively. In a multivariate analyses, PCP's counseling was associated with higher participation in CRC screening (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 5.33, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] 3.55-8.00) and higher rate of unsedated colonoscopies (OR 7.75, 95% CI 2.94-20.45). Conclusion. In opportunistic primary colonoscopy screening, PCP's counseling significantly increases participation rate and decreases demand for sedation compared to recruitment with information materials only. NCT01688817.
    Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 05/2014; DOI:10.3109/00365521.2014.913191 · 2.33 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Blacks have a higher incidence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and worse outcomes compared to whites. Identifying barriers in pancreatic cancer care may explain survival differences and provide areas for intervention. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry (1991-2002). Treatment and outcome data were obtained from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry-Medicare databases. Logistic regression was used to assess race as a predictor of specialist consultation/receipt of therapy. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared. Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed to estimate survival after adjustment for patient and treatment characteristics. A total of 13,230 white patients (90%) and 1478 black patients (10%) were identified. Clinical/pathologic factors were compared by race. When we compared whites and blacks by univariate analyses, blacks had lower rates of specialist consultation (P<.01), chemotherapy (P<.01), and resection (P<.01). On multivariate analyses predicting consultation with a cancer specialist, black race negatively predicted consultation with a medical oncologist (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] .74, P<.01), radiation oncologist (AOR .75, P<.01), and surgeon (AOR .71, P<.01). For predicting receipt of therapy after consultation, blacks were less likely to undergo chemotherapy (AOR .59, P<.01) and resection (AOR .79, P=.05). Blacks had worse overall survival on Kaplan-Meier survival curves (log rank, P<.0001). On Cox proportional hazard modeling evaluating survival, black race was no longer independently associated with worse survival after adjustment for resection and adjuvant therapy (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, .99-1.19). Racial disparities exist in pancreatic cancer specialist consultation and subsequent therapy use. Because receipt of care is fundamental to reducing outcome discrepancies, these barriers serve as discrete intervention points to ensure all locoregional pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients receive appropriate specialist referral and subsequent therapy.
    Annals of Surgical Oncology 09/2009; 16(11):2968-77. DOI:10.1245/s10434-009-0656-5 · 3.94 Impact Factor