Examining Generalizability of Older Adults' Preferences for Discussing Cessation of Screening Colonoscopies in Older Adults with Low Health Literacy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Schoenborn NL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6848333 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Examining Generalizability of Older Adults' Preferences for Discussing Cessation of Screening Colonoscopies in Older Adults with Low Health Literacy.
Schoenborn Nancy L NL Crossnohere Norah L NL Janssen Ellen M EM Pollack Craig E CE Boyd Cynthia M CM Wolff Antonio C AC Xue Qian-Li QL Massare Jacqueline J Blinka Marcela M Bridges John F P JFP
Journal of general internal medicine 20190826 11
<h4>Background/objectives</h4>Many older adults receive unnecessary screening colonoscopies. We previously conducted a survey using a national online panel to assess older adults' preferences for how clinicians can discuss stopping screening colonoscopies. We sought to assess the generalizability of those results by comparing them to a sample of older adults with low health literacy.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional survey.<h4>Setting</h4>Baltimore metropolitan area (low health literacy sample) and ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceOlder adults with limited life expectancy are frequently screened for cancer even though it exposes them to risks of screening with minimal benefit. Patient preferences may be an important contributor to continued screening.ObjectiveTo examine older adults' views on the decision to stop cancer screening when life expectancy is limited and to identify older adults' preferences for how clinicians should communicate recommendations to cease cancer screening.Design, setting, and participantsIn this semistructured interview study, we interviewed 40 community-dwelling older adults (≥ 65 years) recruited at 4 clinical programs affiliated with an urban academic medical center.Main outcomes and measureWe transcribed the audio recorded discussions and analyzed the transcripts using standard techniques of qualitative content analysis to identify major themes and subthemes.ResultsThe participants' average age was 75.7 years. Twenty-three participants (57.5%) were female; 25 (62.5%) were white. Estimated life expectancy was less than 10 years for 19 participants (47.5%). We identified 3 key themes. First, participants were amenable to stopping cancer screening, especially in the context of a trusting relationship with their clinician. Second, although many participants supported using age and health status to individualize the screening decision, they did not often understand the role of life expectancy. All except 2 participants objected to a Choosing Wisely statement about not recommending cancer screening in those with limited life expectancy, often believing that clinicians cannot accurately predict life expectancy. Third, participants preferred that clinicians explain a recommendation to stop screening by incorporating individual health status but were divided on whether life expectancy should be mentioned. Specific wording of life expectancy was important; many felt the language of "you may not live long enough to benefit from this test" was unnecessarily harsh compared with the more positive messaging of "this test would not help you live longer."Conclusions and relevanceAlthough research and clinical practice guidelines recommend using life expectancy to inform cancer screening, older adults may not consider life expectancy important in screening and may not prefer to hear about life expectancy when discussing screening. The described communication preferences can help inform future screening discussions. Better delineating patient-centered approaches to discuss screening cessation is an important step toward optimizing cancer screening in older adults.
| S-EPMC5564296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prognosis is critical in individualizing care for older adults with late life disability. Evidence suggests that preferences for prognostic information may be culturally determined. Yet little is known about the preferences of diverse elders for discussing prognosis.To determine the preferences for discussing prognosis of a diverse sample of older adults with late-life disability.We interviewed 60 older adults with mean age 78 and mean 2.5 Activities of Daily Living dependencies. Participants were recruited from San Francisco's On Lok program, the first Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE). Participants were interviewed in English, Spanish, and Cantonese, and responded to scenarios in which their doctors estimated they had 5 years and 1 year left to live. Open-ended questions explored the reasons for their responses. Results were analyzed qualitatively using grounded theory.Sixty-five percent of participants wanted to discuss the prognosis if their doctor estimated they had?<5 years to live and 75% if the estimate was?<1 year. Three themes were prominent among patients who wanted to discuss prognosis: to prepare, to make the most of the life they had left, and to make medical or health-related decisions. Those who preferred not to discuss prognosis described emotional difficulty, the uncertainty of prognosis, or that it would not be useful. Nearly all participants said that doctors should not make assumptions based on race or ethnicity, though differences between ethnic groups emerged.Most patients in this diverse sample of disabled elders were interested in discussing prognosis, while a substantial minority was not. Among those participants who preferred to discuss prognosis, many said that prognostic information would be important as they made difficult medical and personal decisions in late-life. Clinicians should inquire about preferences for discussing prognosis before sharing prognostic estimates.
| S-EPMC3326105 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic colonoscopies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening were canceled. Patient perceptions of the benefits and risks of routine screening relative to health concerns associated with the COVID-19 pandemic were unknown. Purpose. Assess patient anxiety, worry, and interest in CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. A random sample of 200 patients aged 45 to 75 y with colonoscopy cancellation due to COVID-19 in March to May 2020 were surveyed. Anxiety, COVID-19 and CRC risk perceptions, COVID-19 and CRC worry, likelihood of following through with colonoscopy in the next month, and interest in alternatives to colonoscopy were assessed. Subsequent screening was tracked for 12 mo. Results. Respondents (N = 127/200, 63.5%) were on average 60 y old, female (59%), college educated (62% college degree or more), and White (91%). A substantial portion of patients (46%) stated they may not follow through with a colonoscopy in the next month. There was greater interest in stool-based testing than in delaying screening (48% v. 26%). Women, older patients, and patients indicating tolerance of uncertainty due to complexity reported they were less likely to follow through with colonoscopy in the next month. Greater interest in stool-based testing was related to lower perceptions of CRC risk. Greater interest in delaying screening was related to less worry about CRC and less tolerance of risk. Over 12 mo, 60% of participants completed screening. Patients who stated they were more likely to screen in the next month were more likely to complete CRC screening (P = 0.01). Conclusions. Respondents who had a colonoscopy canceled during the COVID-19 pandemic varied in interest in rescheduling the procedure. A shared decision-making approach may help patients address varying concerns and select the best approach to screening for them.HighlightsIn the wake of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, almost half of patients stated they were not likely to follow through with a colonoscopy in the short term, about half were interested in screening with a stool-based test, and only one-quarter were interested in delaying screening until next year.Patients who perceived themselves at higher risk of colorectal cancer were less interested in stool-based testing, and patients who were more worried about colorectal cancer were less interested in delaying screening.A shared decision-making approach may be necessary to tailor screening discussions for patients during subsequent waves of the pandemic, other occasions where resources are limited and patient preferences vary, or where patients hold conflicting views of screening.
| S-EPMC9749064 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and Objectives:Adults older than 75 years are overscreened for cancer, especially those with less than 10-year life expectancy. This study aimed to learn the effects of providing primary care providers (PCPs) with scripts for discussing stopping mammography and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and with information on patient's 10-year life expectancy on their patients' intentions to be screened for these cancers. Research Design and Methods:Patient participants, identified via PCP appointment logs, completed a questionnaire pre- and postvisit. Primary care providers were given scripts for discussing stopping screening and information on patient's 10-year life expectancy before these visits. Primary care providers completed a questionnaire at the end of the study. Patients and PCPs were asked about discussing stopping cancer screening and patient life expectancy. Patient screening intentions (1-15 Likert scale; lower scores suggest lower intentions) were compared pre- and postvisit using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results:Ninety patients older than 75 years (47% of eligible patients reached by phone) from 45 PCPs participated. Patient mean age was 80.0 years (SD = 2.9), 43 (48%) were female, and mean life expectancy was 9.7 years (SD = 2.4). Thirty-seven PCPs (12 community-based) completed a questionnaire. Primary care providers found the scripts helpful (32 [89%]) and thought they would use them frequently (29 [81%]). Primary care providers also found patient life expectancy information helpful (35 [97%]). However, only 8 PCPs (22%) reported feeling comfortable discussing patient life expectancy. Patients' intentions to undergo CRC screening (9.0 [SD = 5.3] to 6.5 [SD = 6.0], p < .0001) and mammography screening (12.9 [SD = 3.0] to 11.7 [SD = 4.9], p = .08) decreased from pre- to postvisit (significantly for CRC). Sixty-three percent of patients (54/86) were interested in discussing life expectancy with their PCP previsit and 56% (47/84) postvisit. Discussion and Implications:PCPs found scripts for discussing stopping cancer screening and information on patient life expectancy helpful. Possibly, as a result, their patients older than 75 years had lower intentions of being screened for CRC. Clinical Trials Registration Number:NCT03480282.
| S-EPMC7413618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study presents a systematic review on existing cognitive screening tools for mild cognitive impairment and dementia in populations with low education and literacy levels. Cochrane Library, PubMed and LILACS databases were examined for studies including adults aged 50 years old or older with low educational level. 61 articles were included. Despite its frequent use, studies on Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) revealed that educational level biased the score obtained, regardless of other factors. Separately, the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, the Fototest, or the Eurotest, appear to minimize the effect of education and literacy. MMSE is unreliable for individuals with low literacy. Tasks involving reading, writing, arithmetics, drawing, praxis, visuospatial, and visuoconstructive skills have a greater educational bias than naming, orientation, or memory. An adequate determination of educational level and validation of instruments in populations with heterogeneous levels of literacy requires further research.
| S-EPMC8966106 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRecent advances in health monitoring technology have coincided with increases in the number of older adults with cancer, many of whom report difficulty using health information technology (HIT). Previous studies have identified lower electronic health (eHealth) literacy among older adults (≥65 years) compared to younger adults (<65), but studies in older adults with cancer are limited. The goal of this study was to examine age differences in eHealth literacy and use of technology devices/HIT in patients with cancer, and characterize receptivity towards using home-based HIT to communicate with the oncology care team.Materials and methodsPatients (n = 198) in a Radiation Oncology clinic were offered an anonymous written questionnaire assessing demographics, eHealth literacy (eHealth Literacy Scale), current use of HIT, and interest in using home-based HIT.Results and conclusionCompared to younger patients, older patients had significantly lower eHealth literacy (p < .01), and were less likely to feel confident evaluating health resources on the Internet (p < .01) or knowing how to use the health information found on the Internet to help them (p < .01) or answer health questions (p = .01). Older patients were also less likely than younger patients to have an email address (p = .04), own a smartphone (p < .01), or use the online patient portal (p = .03). Regardless of age, most patients were not opposed to using home-based HIT to communicate with their oncology care team. Future studies on HIT use in older adults with cancer should further evaluate barriers to using HIT and ways to maximize implementation and accessibility.
| S-EPMC8320530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDespite clinical practice guidelines recommending against routine cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancy, older adults are still frequently screened for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers.ObjectiveTo examine primary care clinicians' decision-making on stopping breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancy.Design, setting, and participantsIn qualitative interviews coupled with medical record-stimulated recall, clinicians from 17 academic and community clinics affiliated with a large health system were asked how they came to specific cancer screening decisions in 2 or 3 of their older patients with less than 10-year of estimated life expectancy, including patients with and without recent screening. Patients were surveyed by telephone. Data collection occurred between October 2018 and May 2019.Main outcomes and measuresClinician interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed with qualitative content analysis to identify major themes. Patient surveys assessed perception of cancer screening decisions, importance of clinician recommendation, and willingness to stop screening.ResultsTwenty-five primary care clinicians (mean [SD] age, 47.1 [9.7] years; 14 female [56%]) discussed 53 patients during medical record-stimulated recall, ranging from 2 to 3 patients per clinician; 46 patients and 1 caregiver (mean [SD] age 74.9 [5.4]; 31 female [66%]) participated in the survey. Clinician interviews revealed 5 major themes: (1) cancer screening decisions were not always conscious, deliberate decisions; (2) electronic medical record alerts were connected with less deliberate decision-making; (3) cancer screening was not binary and clinicians often considered other options to scale back screening without actually stopping; (4) in addition to patient characteristics, clinicians were influenced by patient request and anecdotal experiences; and (5) influences outside of the primary care clinician-patient dyad were important, such as from specialists and patients' family or friends. Patient surveys asked approximately 64 cancer screening decisions of 47 patients. Patients did not recall approximately half (31 of 64) of their cancer screening decisions. Among those with recent screening, the mean score for willingness to stop screening was 3.2 (95% CI 2.5-3.9) on a 5-point Likert scale (with 1 indicating "extremely unlikely" and 5 indicating "extremely likely"). In most screening decisions that involved specialists (13 of 16), patients valued specialists' recommendations over those of primary care clinicians.Conclusions and relevanceCancer screening decision-making is complex. Study findings suggest that strategies that facilitate more deliberate decision-making may be important in cancer screening of older adults with limited life expectancy.
| S-EPMC7280953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNumerous instruments are designed to measure digital literacy among the general population. However, few studies have assessed the use and appropriateness of these measurements for older populations.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to identify and critically appraise studies assessing digital literacy among older adults and to evaluate how digital literacy instruments used in existing studies address the elements of age-appropriate digital literacy using the European Commission's Digital Competence (DigComp) Framework.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for studies using validated instruments to assess digital literacy among older adults. The quality of all included studies was evaluated using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT). Instruments were assessed according to their ability to incorporate the competence areas of digital literacy as defined by the DigComp Framework: (1) information and data literacy, (2) communication and collaboration, (3) digital content creation, (4) safety, and (5) problem-solving ability, or attitudes toward information and communication technology use.ResultsSearches yielded 1561 studies, of which 27 studies (17 cross-sectional, 2 before and after, 2 randomized controlled trials, 1 longitudinal, and 1 mixed methods) were included in the final analysis. Studies were conducted in the United States (18/27), Germany (3/27), China (1/27), Italy (1/27), Sweden (1/27), Canada (1/27), Iran (1/27), and Bangladesh (1/27). Studies mostly defined older adults as aged ≥50 years (10/27) or ≥60 years (8/27). Overall, the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) was the most frequently used instrument measuring digital literacy among older adults (16/27, 59%). Scores on the CCAT ranged from 34 (34/40, 85%) to 40 (40/40, 100%). Most instruments measured 1 or 2 of the DigComp Framework's elements, but the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (MDPQ) measured all 5 elements, including "digital content creation" and "safety."ConclusionsThe current digital literacy assessment instruments targeting older adults have both strengths and weaknesses, relative to their study design, administration method, and ease of use. Certain instrument modalities like the MDPQ are more generalizable and inclusive and thus, favorable for measuring the digital literacy of older adults. More studies focusing on the suitability of such instruments for older populations are warranted, especially for areas like "digital content creation" and "safety" that currently lack assessment. Evidence-based discussions regarding the implications of digitalization for the treatment of older adults and how health care professionals may benefit from this phenomenon are encouraged.
| S-EPMC7889415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCigarette smoking is a serious global health issue. Limited studies previously analyzed health literacy components in patients undergoing smoking cessation interventions. This study focuses on individuals enrolled in smoking cessation services and investigates the distribution of health literacy in three domains (health care, disease prevention, and health promotion) and four abilities (access, understand, appraise, and apply health information). The study also explores the correlation between background factors (age, BMI, etc.) and health literacy, as well as the differences in health literacy levels among different background variables (gender, etc.).Methods228 individuals completed the health literacy questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analysis, Pearson Correlation, and a Chi-Squared Test were employed to investigate the various health literacy levels and background variables.Results68% had excellent or sufficient health literacy. A total of 32% were considered problematic or to have inadequate health literacy. Of the three domains of health literacy, participants performed better in the healthcare domain. More than one-third were problematic in accessing and appraising information.Conclusionsthis paper, being the pilot study in providing an analysis of health literacy components in individuals undergoing smoking cessation, could serve as a useful reference for devising interventions for different population groups in trying to maximize successful cessation rates.
| S-EPMC10454805 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterest in electronic health (eHealth) technologies to screen for and treat a variety of medical and mental health problems is growing exponentially. However, no studies to date have investigated the feasibility of using such e-tools for older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to describe patterns of Internet use, as well as interest in and preferences for eHealth technologies among older adults with varying degrees of cognitive impairment.MethodsA total of 221 participants (mean age=67.6 years) attending the Healthy Brain Ageing Clinic at the University of Sydney, a specialist mood and memory clinic for adults ?50 years of age, underwent comprehensive clinical and neuropsychological assessment and completed a 20-item self-report survey investigating current technology use and interest in eHealth technologies. Descriptive statistics and Fisher exact tests were used to characterize the findings, including variability in the results based on demographic and diagnostic factors, with diagnoses including subjective cognitive impairment (SCI), MCI, and dementia.ResultsThe sample comprised 27.6% (61/221) SCI, 62.0% (137/221) MCI, and 10.4% (23/221) dementia (mean Mini-Mental State Examination=28.2). The majority of participants reported using mobile phones (201/220, 91.4%) and computers (167/194, 86.1%) routinely, with most respondents having access to the Internet at home (204/220, 92.6%). Variability was evident in the use of computers, mobile phones, and health-related websites in relation to sociodemographic factors, with younger, employed respondents with higher levels of education being more likely to utilize these technologies. Whereas most respondents used email (196/217, 90.3%), the use of social media websites was relatively uncommon. The eHealth intervention of most interest to the broader sample was memory strategy training, with 82.7% (172/208) of participants reporting they would utilize this form of intervention. Preferences for other eHealth interventions varied in relation to educational level, with university-educated participants expressing greater interest in interventions related to mood (P=.01), socialization (P=.02), memory (P=.01), and computer-based exercises (P=.046). eHealth preferences also varied in association, with diagnosis for interventions targeting sleep (P=.01), nutrition (P=.004), vascular risk factors (P=.03), and memory (P=.02).ConclusionsTechnology use is pervasive among older adults with cognitive impairment, though variability was noted in relation to age, education, vocational status, and diagnosis. There is also significant interest in Web-based interventions targeting cognition and memory, as well as other risk factors for cognitive decline, highlighting the urgent need for the development, implementation, and study of eHealth technologies tailored specifically to older adults, including those with MCI and early dementia. Strategies to promote eHealth use among older adults who are retired or have lower levels of education will also need to be considered.
| S-EPMC6257301 | biostudies-literature