Physician colorectal cancer screening recommendations: An examination based on informed decision making

Martin School of Public Policy and Administration, University of Kentucky, KY, USA.
Patient Education and Counseling (Impact Factor: 2.6). 05/2007; 66(1):43-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.10.003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this research was to examine the content of physicians' colorectal cancer screening recommendations. More specifically, using the framework of informed decision making synthesized by Braddock and colleagues, we conducted a qualitative study of the content of recommendations to describe how physicians are currently presenting this information to patients.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 65 primary care physicians. We analyzed responses to a question designed to elicit how the physicians typically communicate their recommendation.
Almost all of the physicians (98.5%) addressed the "nature of decision" element. A majority of physicians discussed "uncertainties associated with the decision" (67.7%). Fewer physicians covered "the patient's role in decision making" (33.8%), "risks and benefits" (16.9%), "alternatives" (10.8%), "assessment of patient understanding" (6.2%), or "exploration of patient's preferences" (1.5%).
We propose that the content of the colorectal screening recommendation is a critical determinant to whether a patient undergoes screening. Our examination of physician recommendations yielded mixed results, and the deficiencies identified opportunities for improvement.
We suggest primary care physicians clarify that screening is meant for those who are asymptotic, present tangible and intangible benefits and risks, as well as make a primary recommendation, and, if needed, a "compromise" recommendation, in order to increase screening utilization.

Download full-text


Available from: Steven A Haist, Aug 24, 2015
  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to identify decision heuristics utilized by primary care physicians in formulating colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Qualitative research using in-depth semi-structured interviews. We interviewed 66 primary care internists and family physicians evenly drawn from academic and community practices. A majority of physicians were male, and almost all were white, non-Hispanic. Three researchers independently reviewed each transcript to determine the physician's decision criteria and developed decision trees. Final trees were developed by consensus. The constant comparative methodology was used to define the categories. Physicians were found to use 1 of 4 heuristics ("age 50," "age 50, if family history, then earlier," "age 50, if family history, then screen at age 40," or "age 50, if family history, then adjust relative to reference case") for the timing recommendation and 5 heuristics ["fecal occult blood test" (FOBT), "colonoscopy," "if not colonoscopy, then...," "FOBT and another test," and "a choice between options"] for the type decision. No connection was found between timing and screening type heuristics. We found evidence of heuristic use. Further research is needed to determine the potential impact on quality of care.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 11/2007; 22(10):1467-9. DOI:10.1007/s11606-007-0338-6 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) has been demonstrated to be effective and is consistently recommended by clinical practice guidelines. However, only slightly over half of all Americans have ever been screened. Patients cite physician recommendation as the most important motivator of screening. This study explored the barriers of and facilitators to physician recommendation of CRCS. A 3-component qualitative study to explore the barriers of and facilitators to physician recommendation of CRCS: in-depth, semistructured interviews with 29 purposively sampled, community- and academic-based primary care physicians; chart-stimulated recall, a technique that utilizes patient charts to probe physician recall and provide context about the barriers of and facilitators to physician recommendation of CRCS during actual clinic encounters; and focus groups with 18 academic primary care physicians. Grounded theory techniques of analysis were used. All the participating physicians were aware of and recommended CRCS. The overwhelmingly preferred test was colonoscopy. Barriers of physician recommendation of CRCS included patient comorbidities, prior patient refusal of screening, physician forgetfulness, acute care visits, lack of time, and lack of reminder systems and test tracking systems. Facilitators to physician recommendation of CRCS included patient request, patient age 50-59, physician positive attitudes about CRCS, physician prioritization of screening, visits devoted to preventive health, reminders, and incentives. There are multiple physician, patient, and system barriers to recommending CRCS. Thus, interventions may need to target barriers at multiple levels to successfully increase physician recommendation of CRCS.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 01/2008; 22(12):1681-8. DOI:10.1007/s11606-007-0396-9 · 3.42 Impact Factor
Show more