Colonoscopist and primary care physician supply and disparities in colorectal cancer screening.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Benarroch-Gampel J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3243108 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine whether having a primary care physician (PCP) is associated with reduced ethnic disparities for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and whether clustering of minorities within PCPs contributes to the disparities.Data sources/study settingRetrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries age 66-75 in 2009 in Texas.Study designThe percentage of beneficiaries up to date in CRC screening in 2009 was stratified by race/ethnicity. Multilevel models were used to study the effect of having a PCP and PCP characteristics on the racial and ethnic disparities on CRC screening.Data collection/extraction methodsMedicare data from 2000 to 2009 were used to assess prior CRC screening.Principal findingsOdds of undergoing CRC screening were more than twice as high in patients with a PCP (OR = 2.05, 95 percent CI 2.03-2.07). After accounting for clustering and PCP characteristics, the black-white disparity in CRC screening rates almost disappears and the Hispanic-white disparity decreases substantially.ConclusionsEthnic disparities in CRC screening in the elderly are mostly explained by decreased access to PCPs and by clustering of minorities within PCPs less likely to screen any of their patients.
| S-EPMC3480966 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE: To identify primary care practice characteristics associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening performance, controlling for patient-level factors. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Primary care director survey (1999-2000) of 155 VA primary care clinics linked with 38,818 eligible patients' sociodemographics, utilization, and CRC screening experience using centralized administrative and chart-review data (2001). STUDY DESIGN: Practices were characterized by degrees of centralization (e.g., authority over operations, staffing, outside-practice influence); resources (e.g., sufficiency of nonphysician staffing, space, clinical support arrangements); and complexity (e.g., facility size, academic status, managed care penetration), adjusting for patient-level covariates and contextual factors. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Chart-based evidence of CRC screening through direct colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or consecutive fecal occult blood tests, eliminating cases with documented histories of CRC, polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and health care utilization, patients were significantly more likely to be screened for CRC if their primary care practices had greater autonomy over the internal structure of care delivery (p<.04), more clinical support arrangements (p<.03), and smaller size (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Deficits in primary care clinical support arrangements and local autonomy over operational management and referral procedures are associated with significantly lower CRC screening performance. Competition with hospital resource demands may impinge on the degree of internal organization of their affiliated primary care practices.
| S-EPMC1955248 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionCost sharing can deter the use of health services and act as a potential contributor to racial/ethnic disparities in cancer. The Affordable Care Act required most health plans to cover, without cost sharing, preventive services, including colorectal cancer screening. Population-based data were used to estimate the impact of the Affordable Care Act's cost-sharing provision (together with other Affordable Care Act provisions targeting preventive care) on ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening, comparing Hispanics with non-Hispanics.MethodsAn interrupted time series quasi-experimental analysis was used to examine ethnic differences in colorectal cancer screening pre- and post-implementation of the Affordable Care Act (analysis performed in 2018). The study cohort included insured individuals aged 50-64 years who participated in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2007 through 2015 (n=44,343).ResultsDuring the pre-Affordable Care Act period, screening rates decreased annually for non-Hispanics by -0.38 per 100 adults per year (95% CI= -0.55, -0.22) but remained level for Hispanics (annual trend per 100 adults: 0.01, 95% CI= -0.34, 0.35). After cost sharing was eliminated in 2011, colorectal cancer screening rates increased for both Hispanics (by 1.29 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.69, 1.89) and non-Hispanics (by 0.58 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.18, 0.99). The difference in trend increases between Hispanics and non-Hispanics was not statistically significant (0.70%, 95% CI= -0.24, 1.64).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that Affordable Care Act implementation resulted in increased colorectal cancer screening; however, the effect of the law was not significantly different between Hispanics and non-Hispanics. These results provide indications that more needs to be done to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening.
| S-EPMC8285085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDisparities in quality of care according to patient race and socioeconomic status persist in the US. Differential referral patterns to specialist physicians might be associated with observed disparities.ObjectiveTo examine whether differences exist between Black and White Medicare beneficiaries in the observed patterns of patient sharing between primary care physicians (PCPs) and physicians in the 6 specialties to which patients were most frequently referred.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional observational study of Black and White Medicare beneficiaries used claims data from 2009 to 2010 on 100% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries who were seen by PCPs and selected high-volume specialists in 12 health care markets with at least 10% of the population being Black. Statistical analyses were conducted from December 20, 2017, to September 30, 2020.ExposuresDifferences in patterns of patient sharing among Black and White patients.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary care physician and specialist degree (the number of other PCPs or specialists to whom each physician is connected) and strength (the number of shared patients per connection, overall, for Black patients and White patients and after equalizing the numbers of Black and White patients per PCP), as well as distance between PCP and patient and specialist zip code centroids.ResultsThe 12 selected markets ranged in size from Manhattan, New York (187 054 Black or White beneficiaries seen by at least 2 physicians within an episode of care; 9794 total physicians), to Tallahassee, Florida (44 644 Black or White beneficiaries seen by at least 2 physicians within an episode of care; 847 total physicians). The percentage of Black beneficiaries ranged from 11.5% (Huntsville, Alabama) to 46.8% (Chicago, Illinois). The mean PCP-specialist degree (number of specialists with whom a PCP shares patients) was lower for Black patients than for White patients. For instance, the mean PCP-cardiologist degree across all markets for White patients was 17.5 compared with 8.8 for Black patients. After sampling White patients to equalize the numbers of patients seen, the degree differences narrowed but were still not equivalent in many markets (eg, for all specialties in Baton Rouge, Louisiana: 4.5 for Black patients vs 5.7 for White patients). Specialist networks among White patients were much larger than those constructed based just on Black patients (eg, for cardiology across all markets: 135 for Black patients vs 330 for White patients), even after equalizing the numbers of patients seen per PCP (123 for Black patients vs 211 for White patients). The overall test for differences in referral patterns was statistically significant for all 6 specialties examined in 7 of the 12 markets and in 5 specialties for another 3.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that differences exist in specialist referral patterns by race among Medicare beneficiaries. This is an observational study, and thus some differences might have resulted from patient-initiated visits to specialists.
| S-EPMC7835717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite the documented benefits of colorectal cancer screening, patient participation rates remain low. Physician recommendation has been identified as a significant predictor of screening completion.The aim of this study is to investigate how primary care physicians perceive colorectal cancer screening communication tasks, as well as to explore the form and content of actual screening discussions.The research design includes a mailed physician survey and a separate observational study in a sample of videotaped medical encounters. PARTICIPANTS AND DATA SOURCES: The participants were 270 primary care physicians who completed a mailed questionnaire (57.9% response rate) and 18 physician-patient encounters that included discussions of colorectal cancer screening.The questionnaire focused on perceived importance and accomplishment of communication tasks relevant to colorectal cancer screening. Two of the authors reviewed transcripts of videotaped physician encounters to determine whether the same communication tasks assessed in the survey were accomplished. Interrater reliability was high across all of the mutually exclusive coding categories (Kappa > .90).Physicians rated colonoscopy as the most important screening option to discuss; self-reports indicate that colonoscopy (84.8%) is more frequently mentioned than fecal occult blood test (FOBT; 49.4%), flexible sigmoidoscopy (34.1%), or computed tomography (CT) imaging (18.1%). Explaining benefits and risks, describing test procedure and frequency, eliciting patient preferences, and making a plan for screening were all viewed as very important. Self-reported accomplishment of these communication tasks was considerably higher than that observed in our separate videotape sample.Most physicians recognize and espouse the importance of recommending colorectal cancer screening to eligible patients. However, findings from both the physician survey and observational study suggest that physicians tend to overestimate the extent of discussions about screening. Interventions may be warranted to improve clinical practice.
| S-EPMC2219805 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundHigher primary care physician supply is associated with lower mortality due to heart disease, cancer and stroke, but its relation to diabetes care and outcomes is unknown. We examined the association between primary care physician supply and evidence-based testing and hospital visits for people with diabetes in naturally occurring multispecialty physician networks in Ontario, Canada.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis between Apr. 1, 2009, and Mar. 31, 2011, using linked administrative data. We included all Ontario residents over 40 years of age with a diagnosis of diabetes before Apr. 1, 2007, who were alive on Apr. 1, 2009 (N = 712 681). We tested the association between physician supply and outcomes at the network level using separate Poisson regression models for urban and nonurban physician networks. We accounted for clustering at the physician and network level and adjusted for patient characteristics.ResultsPatients in physician networks with a high supply of primary care physicians were more likely to receive the optimal number of evidence-based tests for diabetes than patients in networks with low primary care physician supply (urban relative risk [RR] 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.07; nonurban RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.14-1.21) but were no different regarding emergency department visits (urban RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94-1.17; nonurban RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85-1.08) or hospital admissions for diabetes complications (urban RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.89-1.14; nonurban RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77-1.07).InterpretationHaving more primary care physicians per capita is associated with better diabetes care but not with reduced hospital visits in this setting. Further research to understand this relation and how it varies by setting is important for resource planning.
| S-EPMC4866922 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collect shows promise to increase cervical cancer screening rates in underscreened populations, such as Somali patients, but little is known about how to integrate such an approach in primary care. In this study, primary care providers and staff who provide primary care services to Somali women were asked for their views on integrating HPV self-collect into routine care to address cervical cancer screening disparities. Thirty primary care providers and staff participated in semi-structured interviews exploring their views on HPV self-collect and their anticipated needs or barriers to implementing this approach into the clinic generally and with specific patient populations, such as Somali women. A thematic analysis using the constructivist version of grounded theory was undertaken. Providers and staff anticipate positive patient reaction to the option of HPV self-collect, and were interested in using this approach both for Somali patients and for all patients in general. HPV self-collect was viewed as straightforward to integrate into existing clinic workflows. Providers largely lacked awareness of the evidence supporting primary HPV testing and HPV self-collect specifically, sharing concerns about effectiveness of self-collect and the lack of a physical exam. Providers felt clinic-wide staff education and patient education, along with strategies to address disparities, such as cultural and linguistic tailoring would be needed for successful implementation. Integrating HPV self-collect as an option in the cervical cancer screening process in a primary care clinical encounter offers considerable opportunity to address health disparities and may benefit all patients.
| S-EPMC10825356 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe conducted a cluster-randomized trial evaluating an intervention that trained Chinese-American primary care physicians to increase their Chinese patients' colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.MethodsTwenty-five physicians (13 randomized to the intervention arm and 12 to the control arm) and 479 of their patients (aged 50-75 and nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines) were enrolled. The intervention, guided by Social Cognitive Theory, included a communication guide and 2 in-office training sessions to enhance physicians' efficacy in com- municating CRC screening with patients. Patients' CRC screening rates (trial outcome) and rating of physician communication before intervention and at 12-month follow-up were assessed. Intention-to-treat analysis for outcome evaluation was conducted.ResultsScreening rates were slightly higher in the intervention vs. the control arm (24.4% vs. 17.7%, p = .24). In post hoc analyses, intervention arm patients who perceived better communication were more likely to be screened than those who did not (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.15). This relationship was not seen in the control arm.ConclusionsThis physician-focused intervention had small, non-significant effects in increasing Chinese patients' CRC screening rates. Physician communication appeared to explain intervention efficacy. More intensive interventions are needed to enhance Chinese patients' CRC screening.
| S-EPMC5765879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent colorectal cancer screening studies focus on optimizing adherence. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of interventions using electronic health records (EHRs); automated mailings; and stepped support increases to improve 2-year colorectal cancer screening adherence.Analyses were based on a parallel-design, randomized trial in which three stepped interventions (EHR-linked mailings ["automated"]; automated plus telephone assistance ["assisted"]; or automated and assisted plus nurse navigation to testing completion or refusal [navigated"]) were compared to usual care. Data were from August 2008 to November 2011, with analyses performed during 2012-2013. Implementation resources were micro-costed; research and registry development costs were excluded. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were based on number of participants current for screening per guidelines over 2 years. Bootstrapping examined robustness of results.Intervention delivery cost per participant current for screening ranged from $21 (automated) to $27 (navigated). Inclusion of induced testing costs (e.g., screening colonoscopy) lowered expenditures for automated (ICER=-$159) and assisted (ICER=-$36) relative to usual care over 2 years. Savings arose from increased fecal occult blood testing, substituting for more expensive colonoscopies in usual care. Results were broadly consistent across demographic subgroups. More intensive interventions were consistently likely to be cost effective relative to less intensive interventions, with willingness to pay values of $600-$1,200 for an additional person current for screening yielding ?80% probability of cost effectiveness.Two-year cost effectiveness of a stepped approach to colorectal cancer screening promotion based on EHR data is indicated, but longer-term cost effectiveness requires further study.
| S-EPMC4441758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of the study is to determine if a Web-based intervention increases physician rates of colorectal cancer recommendation rates in a group of physicians participating in the American Board of Internal Medicine’s Maintenance of Certification Program. This study will also compare the content of practice improvement plans submitted by the diplomats in each study arm to determine the components of the plans that are associated with colorectal cancer rates.
| 2076374 | ecrin-mdr-crc