Dataset Information

Patient Preferences for Test Result Notification.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Patients are increasingly being given access to their test results, but little is known about how preferences vary with the test under consideration or the results of the test (normal or abnormal).

Objective

This study was conducted to examine preferences for test result communication.

Design, setting, and participants

We surveyed adults to explore their preferences for test result notification for three common diagnostic tests of varying "emotional impact" (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA], genital herpes, and cancer biopsy) when test results were 1) normal and 2) abnormal. We conducted our survey between June and August 2012 on the campus of an academic medical center. For each scenario, subjects were asked to rank seven methods that might be used to communicate test results (letter, unsecured email, secured email, text message, telephone call, secure Web portal, office visit) in order of acceptability.

Main outcome measures

The main measures were the percentage of respondents who ranked a particular test result notification method favorably and the percentage who ranked it as unacceptable.

Results

When test results were normal, subjects' notification preferences were generally similar for DXA, herpes and cancer biopsy, with telephone and letter ranked most favorably for all three tests. Conversely, text message and unsecured email were viewed as unacceptable notification methods for normal results by 45.0-55.0 % of subjects across all three tests. When test results were abnormal, office visits became more popular. A higher proportion of subjects ranked office visits as their most preferred notification method for our test with high "emotional impact" (cancer biopsy) (38.4 %) as compared to DXA (28.2 %) and herpes (27.9 %) (P = 0.02). For most test scenarios, younger subjects appeared to rank electronic communication modalities (secure email or Web portal) higher than older subjects, though this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.29).

Conclusions

Preferences for test result notification can differ substantially depending upon the test under consideration and results of the test. Providers and health care systems should consider these factors when deciding how to communicate results to patients.

SUBMITTER: Shultz SK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4617924 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Calcium and vitamin D intake and exercise are suboptimal among older adults. Following bone densitometry, a letter communicating individualized fracture risk accompanied by an educational brochure improved participants' lifestyle-but no more than existing communication strategies-over 52 weeks. Simple communication strategies are insufficient for achieving optimal levels of bone health behaviors. PURPOSE:The Patient Activation After DXA Result Notification (PAADRN) study was designed to evaluate whether a letter with individualized fracture risk and an educational brochure mailed to patients soon after their DXA might improve bone health behaviors (daily calcium intake, vitamin D supplementation, and weekly exercise sessions) compared to slower, less individualized communication characterizing usual care. METHODS:Participants ??50 years were recruited, at three sites, following their DXA and randomized with 1:1 allocation to intervention and control (usual care only) groups. Data were collected at enrollment interview and by phone survey at 12 and 52 weeks thereafter. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted on 7749 of the 20,397 eligible participants who enrolled. Changes in bone health behaviors were compared within and between study groups. Average treatment effects and heterogeneity of treatment effects were estimated with multivariable linear and logistic regression models. RESULTS:In unadjusted analyses, calcium intake, vitamin D supplementation, and weekly exercise sessions increased significantly over 52 weeks within both the intervention and control groups (all p?<?0.001). In unadjusted analyses and multivariable models, increases in each behavior did not significantly differ between the intervention and control groups. Intervention group participants with a >?20% 10-year fracture risk at enrollment did, however, have a significantly greater increase in calcium intake compared to other study participants (p?=?0.031). CONCLUSIONS:Bone health behaviors improved, on average, over 52 weeks among all participants following a DXA. Receipt of the PAADRN letter and educational brochure did not directly improve bone health behaviors compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The Patient Activation after DXA Result Notification (PAADRN) Study is registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT01507662, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01507662.

Project description:ImportanceMany patients presently have access to their pathologic test result reports via online patient portals, yet little is known about pathologists' perspective on this topic.ObjectiveTo examine dermatopathologists' experience and perceptions of patient online access to pathology reports.Design, setting, and participantsA survey of 160 dermatopathologists currently practicing in the United States who are board certified and/or fellowship trained in dermatopathology was conducted between July 15, 2018, and September 23, 2019. Those who reported interpreting skin biopsies of melanocytic lesions within the previous year and expected to continue interpreting them for the next 2 years were included.Main outcomes and measuresDermatopathologists' demographic and clinical characteristics, experiences with patient online access to pathologic test result reports, potential behaviors and reactions to patient online access to those reports, and effects on patients who read their pathologic test result reports online.ResultsOf the 160 participating dermatopathologists from the 226 eligible for participation (71% response rate), 107 were men (67%); mean (SD) age was 49 (9.7) years (range, 34-77 years). Ninety-one participants (57%) reported that patients have contacted them directly about pathologic test reports they had written. Some participants noted that they would decrease their use of abbreviations and/or specialized terminology (57 [36%]), change the way they describe lesions suspicious for cancer (29 [18%]), and need specialized training in communicating with patients (39 [24%]) if patients were reading their reports. Most respondents perceived that patient understanding would increase (97 [61%]) and the quality of patient-physician communication would increase (98 [61%]) owing to the availability of online reports. Slightly higher proportions perceived increased patient worry (114 [71%]) and confusion (116 [73%]). However, on balance, most participants (114 [71%]) agreed that making pathologic test result reports available to patients online is a good idea.Conclusions and relevanceDermatopathologists in this survey study perceived both positive and negative consequences of patient online access to pathologic test result reports written by the respondents. Most participants believe that making pathologic test result reports available to patients online is a good idea; however, they also report concerns about patient worry and confusion increasing as a result. Further research regarding best practices and the effect on both patients and clinicians is warranted.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, but these can be reduced significantly with population screening using annual fecal occult blood tests (FOBT)A positive FOBT requires timely follow-up with colonoscopy to maximize screening benefits.. Several barriers to follow-up have been identified, with patient health behaviors and choices comprising a significant part of these. The Patient Activation Measure (PAM) assesses knowledge, skills, beliefs, and confidence in managing health. Increased patient activation is related to positive health outcomes. The aim of this study is to examine the association between patient empowerment, as reflected in the PAM, and follow-up colonoscopy within 90?days of a positive FOBT result. METHODS:This case-control study included 429 patients with a positive FOBT, 174 who had a colonoscopy within 90?days, and 255 who did not.. Participants completed a PAM telephone questionnaire (Cronbach's ??=?0.785). We used both univariate and multivariate analyses to examine the effect of the PAM score as on the likelihood of undergoing colonoscopy, after adjusting for the independent variables. RESULTS:In this study we did not find a significant association between PAM and adherence to colonoscopy, using both univariate and multivariate analyses (p?=?.334 and p?=?.697, whether PAM was defined as a continuous or as categorical, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:This study was the first to examine the association between patient empowerment, as reflected in the patient activation measure, and adherence to colonoscopy after a positive FOBT. The findings did not support such an association. Further examination is required to clarify the relation between patient empowerment and activation and personal healthcare in general, and in the Israeli population in particular. Future policy should include specific, technical interventions to improve FOBT follow-up among all groups, until the patient-related barriers are better understood. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02534142 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02534142.

Project description:ImportanceIncreasing participation in fecal screening tests is a major challenge in countries that have implemented colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs.ObjectiveTo determine whether providing general practitioners (GPs) a list of patients who are nonadherent to CRC screening enhances patient participation in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT).Design, setting, and participantsA 3-group, cluster-randomized study was conducted from July 14, 2015, to July 14, 2016, on the west coast of France, with GPs in 801 practices participating and involving adult patients (50-74 years) who were at average risk of CRC and not up-to-date with CRC screening. The final follow-up date was July 14, 2016.InterventionsGeneral practitioners were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 496 received a list of patients who had not undergone CRC screening (patient-specific reminders group, 10 476 patients), 495 received a letter describing region-specific CRC screening adherence rates (generic reminders group, 10 606 patients), and 455 did not receive any reminders (usual care group, 10 147 patients).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was patient participation in CRC screening 1 year after the intervention.ResultsAmong 1482 randomized GPs (mean age, 53.4 years; 576 women [38.9%]), 1446 participated; of the 33 044 patients of these GPs (mean age, 59.7 years; 17 949 women [54.3%]), follow-up at 1 year was available for 31 229 (94.5%). At 1 year, 24.8% (95% CI, 23.4%-26.2%) of patients in the specific reminders group, 21.7% (95% CI, 20.5%-22.8%) in the generic reminders group, and 20.6% (95% CI, 19.3%-21.8%) in the usual care group participated in the FIT screening. The between-group differences were 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3%-5.0%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the generic reminders group, 4.2% (95% CI, 2.3%-6.2%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the usual care group, and 1.1% (95% CI, -0.6% to 2.8%) for generic reminders group vs the usual care group.Conclusions and relevanceProviding French GPs caring for adults at average risk of CRC with a list of their patients who were not up-to-date with their CRC screening resulted in a small but significant increase in patient participation in FIT screening at 1 year compared with patients who received usual care. Providing GPs with generic reminders about regional rates of CRC screening did not increase screening rates compared with usual care.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02515344.