Dataset Information

Mammography decision making: Trends and predictors of provider communication in the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011 to 2014.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended that the decision to initiate screening mammography before age 50 years should be individualized. Herein, the authors examined whether health care providers are communicating regarding mammography decision making with women and whether communication is associated with screening behavior. METHODS:Data were drawn from the 2011 to 2014 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). A total of 5915 female respondents aged???40 years who responded to the following question were included: "Has a doctor or other health professional ever told you that you could choose whether or not to have a mammogram?" We used logistic regression to generate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for predictors of provider communication and assessed whether provider communication was associated with mammography in the previous 2 years overall and stratified by age. RESULTS:Fewer than 50% of the women reported provider communication regarding mammogram choice. Women who reported provider communication were not found to be more likely to report no mammogram within the past 2 years (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.87-1.31) compared with those who did not. When stratified by 10-year age group, provider communication was associated with a higher likelihood of no mammogram only among women age ?70 years (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.15-2.34), and was associated with a lower likelihood of no mammogram only among women aged 40 to 49 years (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.92). CONCLUSIONS:Between 2011 and 2014, less than one-half of women received communication regarding mammogram choice despite recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force. Provider communication regarding mammogram choice can influence screening behavior, particularly for younger and older women. Cancer 2017;123:401-409. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

SUBMITTER: Spring LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5258770 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mammography decision making: Trends and predictors of provider communication in the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011 to 2014.

Spring Laura M LM Marshall Megan R MR Warner Erica T ET

Cancer 20161011 3

<h4>Background</h4>In 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended that the decision to initiate screening mammography before age 50 years should be individualized. Herein, the authors examined whether health care providers are communicating regarding mammography decision making with women and whether communication is associated with screening behavior.<h4>Methods</h4>Data were drawn from the 2011 to 2014 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). A total of 5915 female respon ...[more]

PMID: 27727457

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPoor patient-provider communication, among other reasons, is a notable barrier to contraceptive decision-making among Latinas. Patient-centered approaches to contraceptive counseling that optimize communication align with shared decision-making (SDM) -which is associated with satisfaction and continued contraceptive use among various populations.ObjectiveTo examine associations of patient-provider communication and importance of SDM tenets with consistent contraceptive use among a population of Latinas.Patient involvementFormative work for this study included prior qualitative and quantitative research with Latinas who expressed the importance of patient-provider communication during contraceptive counseling and therefore were instrumental in problem definition.MethodsCross-sectional surveys were administered to Latinas ages 15-29 years. Patient-provider communication, patient-reported importance of specific SDM tenets, and consistent contraception use were measured and analyzed for associations.Results103 Latinas (mean age = 21.4) participated. 33% of participants<21 years were using contraception consistently vs. 67% for those ≥ 21 (p = 0.003). Among participants ≥ 21, consistent users reported higher communication scores compared to inconsistent users and non-users (p = 0.042). For participants< 21, consistent users were more likely than inconsistent users and non-users to report that 2 SDM tenets (discussion of contraceptive preferences and avoidance of race/ethnic-based judgement) are important (p = 0.052, 0.028, respectively).DiscussionPatient-provider communication was especially important for Latinas ≥ 21 while using an SDM approach during counseling was highly valued by those<21. Patient-centered approaches to contraceptive counseling provide opportunities to optimize healthcare delivery for this vulnerable population.Practical valueResults from this research demonstrate that patient-centered communication is highly valued by Latina study participants and is an important consideration in their contraceptive counseling. Clinicians should consider employing techniques such as SDM as they seek to provide patient-centered care during contraceptive counseling for this patient population.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic pain has emerged as a disease in itself, affecting a growing number of people. Effective patient-provider communication is central to good pain management because pain can only be understood from the patient's perspective. We aimed to develop a user-centered tool to improve patient-provider communication about chronic pain and assess its feasibility in real-world settings in preparation for further evaluation and distribution. METHODS:To identify and prioritize patient treatment goals for chronic pain, strategies to improve patient-provider communication about chronic pain, and facilitate implementation of the tool, we conducted nominal group technique meetings and card sorting with patients with chronic pain and experienced providers (n =?12). These findings informed the design of the PainAPP tool. Usability and beta-testing with patients (n =?38) and their providers refined the tool and assessed its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact. RESULTS:Formative work revealed that patients felt neither respected nor trusted by their providers and focused on transforming providers' negative attitudes towards them, whereas providers focused on gathering patient information. PainAPP incorporated areas prioritized by patients and providers: assessing patient treatment goals and preferences, functional abilities and pain, and providing patients tailored education and an overall summary that patients can share with providers. Beta-testing involved 38 patients and their providers. Half of PainAPP users shared their summaries with their providers. Patients rated PainAPP highly in all areas. All users would recommend it to others with chronic pain; nearly all trusted the information and said it helped them think about my treatment goals (94%), understand my chronic pain (82%), make the most of my next doctor's visit (82%), and not want to use opioids (73%). Beta-testing revealed challenges delivering the tool and summary report to patients and providers in a timely manner and obtaining provider feedback. CONCLUSIONS:PainAPP appears feasible for use, but further adaptation and testing is needed to assess its impact on patients and providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This study was approved by the University of New England Independent Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (012616-019) and was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (protocol ID: NCT03425266) prior to enrollment. The trial was prospectively registered and was approved on February 7, 2018.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In Spain, women invited to breast screening are not usually informed about potential harms of screening. The objective of the InforMa study is to assess the effect of receiving information about the benefits and harms of breast screening on informed choice and other decision-making outcomes, in women approaching the age of invitation to mammography screening. METHODS:Two-stage randomised controlled trial. In the first stage, 40 elementary territorial units of the public healthcare system were selected and randomised to intervention or control. In the second stage, women aged 49-50 years were randomly selected. The target sample size was 400 women. Women in the intervention arm received a decision aid (DA) with detailed information on the benefits and harms of screening. Women in the control arm received a standard leaflet that did not mention harms and recommended accepting the invitation to participate in the Breast Cancer Screening Program (BCSP). The primary outcome was informed choice, defined as adequate knowledge and intentions consistent with attitudes. Secondary outcomes included decisional conflict, worry about breast cancer, time perspective, opinions about the DA or the leaflet, and participation in the BCSP. RESULTS:In the intervention group, 23.2% of 203 women made an informed choice compared to only 0.5% of 197 women in the control group (p < 0.001). Attitudes and intentions were similar in both study groups with a high frequency of women intending to be screened, 82.8% vs 82.2% (p = 0.893). Decisional conflict was significantly lower in the intervention group. No differences were observed in confidence in the decision, anxiety, and participation in BCSP. CONCLUSIONS:Women in Spain lack knowledge on the benefits and harms of breast screening. Providing quantitative information on benefits and harms has produced a considerable increase in knowledge and informed choice, with a high acceptance of the informative materials. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Trial identifier NCT03046004 at ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Registered on February 4 2017. Trial name: InforMa study.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Communication is key in chronic disease management, and the internet has altered the manner in which patients and providers can exchange information. Adoption of secure messaging differs among patients due to the digital divide that keeps some populations from having effective access to online resources. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to examine the current state of online patient-provider communication, exploring trends over time in the use of online patient-provider communication tools. METHODS:A 3-part analytic process was used to study the following: (1) reanalysis, (2) close replication across years, and (3) trend analysis extension. During the reanalysis stage, the publicly available Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 1 and 2 data were used with the goal of identifying the precise analytic methodology used in a prior study, published in 2007. The original analysis was extended to add 3 additional data years (ie, 2008, 2011, and 2013) using the original analytical approach with the purpose of identifying trends over time. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze pooled data across all years, with year as an added predictor, in addition to a model for each individual data year. RESULTS:The odds of internet users to communicate online with health care providers was significantly and increasingly higher year-over-year, starting in 2003 (2005: odds ratio [OR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.03-1.68; 2008: OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.76-2.59; 2011: OR 2.92, 95% CI 2.33-3.66; and 2013: OR 5.77; 95% CI 4.62-7.20). Statistically significant socio-economic factors found to be associated with internet users communicating online with providers included age, having health insurance, having a history of cancer, and living in an urban area of residence. CONCLUSIONS:The proportion of internet users communicating online with their health care providers has significantly increased since 2003. Although these trends are encouraging, access challenges still exist for some groups, potentially giving rise to a new set of health disparities related to communication.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic conditions present major health problems, affecting an increasing number of individuals who experience a variety of symptoms that impact their health related quality of life. Digital tools can be of support in chronic conditions, potentially improving patient-provider communication, promoting shared decision making for treatment and care, and possibly even improving patient outcomes. This study aimed to develop a digital tool for patient-provider communication in chronic health care settings and describes the data collection and subsequent content and software development of the InvolveMe tool. InvolveMe will provide patients with the opportunity to report symptoms and preferences to their health care providers (HCP), and to use secure messaging to interact with the HCPs. METHOD:The study employed a combination of interviews with patients with chronic conditions and focus groups with HCPs, examining experiences with chronic conditions and the potential use of a digital tool for support. Participants were recruited from two outpatient clinics at a university hospital. Data collected from interviews and focus groups were analysed using thematic analysis. Content and software development was informed by the data collection and by tool development workshops. RESULTS:Analyses from interviews with patients (n?=?14) and focus groups with HCPs (n?=?11) generated three main themes: 1) Making symptoms and challenges visible, 2) Mastering a new life, and 3) Digital opportunities for follow-up. Each main theme generated separate subthemes. Theme 1 and 2 gave input for content development of the symptom and needs assessment part of the tool, while theme 3 provided ideas for the software development of the InvolveMe tool. Tool development workshops with patients (n?=?6) and HCPs (n?=?6) supplemented the development. CONCLUSIONS:A digital tool such as InvolveMe has the potential to support shared decision making for patients with chronic health conditions. Through integration with an existing patient portal such a tool can provide opportunities for meaningful interactions and communication between patients and HCP's, particularly with regards to symptoms, needs and preferences for care.

Project description:BackgroundThe decision to participate or not in breast cancer screening is complex due to the trade-off between the expected benefit of breast cancer mortality reduction and the major harm of overdiagnosis. It seems ethically necessary to inform women so that they can actively participate in decision-making and make an informed choice based on their values and preferences. The objective of this study is to assess the effects of receiving information about the benefits and harms of screening on decision-making, in women approaching the age of invitation to mammography screening.MethodsA two-stage, randomized controlled trial (RCT). In the first stage, 40 Basic Health Areas (BHAs) will be selected and randomized to intervention or control. In the second stage, women within each BHA will be randomly selected (n = 400). Four breast cancer screening programs (BCSPs) of the Spanish public health system, three in Catalonia and one in the Canary Islands will participate in the study. Women in the intervention arm will receive a leaflet with detailed information on the benefits and harms of screening using mammography. Women in the control arm will receive a standard leaflet that does not mention harms and recommends accepting the invitation to participate in the biennial examinations of the BCSP. The primary outcome is informed choice, a dichotomous variable that combines knowledge, attitudes, and intentions. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict; confidence in the decision made; anxiety about screening participation; worry about breast cancer; anticipated regret; time perspective; perceived importance of benefits/harms of screening; perceived risk of breast cancer; and leaflet acceptability. Primary and secondary outcomes are assessed 2-3 weeks after the intervention.DiscussionThis is the first RCT that assesses the effect of informing about the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening in Spain in women facing the decision to be screened using mammography. It aims to assess the impact of information on several decisional outcomes and to contribute to paving the road towards shared decision-making in breast cancer screening in our country.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registry, ID: NCT03046004 . Retrospectively registered on 4 February 2017. Trial name: InforMa study.

Dataset Information

Mammography decision making: Trends and predictors of provider communication in the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011 to 2014.

Publications

Mammography decision making: Trends and predictors of provider communication in the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011 to 2014.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure