Dataset Information

Physician-office vs home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible US adults.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Guidelines of the American Cancer Society and US Preventive Services Task Force specify that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test (FIT) should be done at home. We therefore examined the prevalence and correlates of CRC screening using FOBT/FIT in physicians' office vs at home. METHODS:Analysis of 9493 respondents 50-75 years old from the Cancer Control Supplement of the 2015 National Health Interview Survey was conducted. Weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the determinants of in-office vs home use of FOBT/FIT for CRC screening. RESULTS:Of the overall sample of screening-eligible adults (n = 9403), only 937 (10.4%) respondents underwent CRC screening using FOBT/FIT within the past year; among this screening population, 279 (28.3%) respondents were screened in-office. We found that sociodemographic factors alone, not CRC risk factors, determined whether FOBT/FIT would be used in-office or at home. Hispanics had greater odds of being screened in-office using FOBT/FIT (aOR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.05-3.99). Compared with those 50-59 years old, respondents 70-75 years old were less likely to be screened in-office using FOBT/FIT (aOR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.25-0.79). Similarly, individuals residing in the Western region of the country had lower odds of in-office FOBT/FIT (aOR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.11-0.58). CONCLUSION:Amid low overall uptake rates of FOBT/FIT in the United States, in-physician office testing is high, indicative of a missed opportunity for effective screening and poor adherence of physicians to national guidelines. Sociodemographic factors are determinants of uptake of FOBT/FIT at home or in-office and should be considered in designing interventions aimed at providers and the general population.

SUBMITTER: Chido-Amajuoyi OG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6885889 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physician-office vs home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible US adults.

Chido-Amajuoyi Onyema Greg OG Sharma Anushree A Talluri Rajesh R Tami-Maury Irene I Shete Sanjay S

Cancer medicine 20191021 17

<h4>Background</h4>Guidelines of the American Cancer Society and US Preventive Services Task Force specify that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test (FIT) should be done at home. We therefore examined the prevalence and correlates of CRC screening using FOBT/FIT in physicians' office vs at home.<h4>Methods</h4>Analysis of 9493 respondents 50-75 years old from the Cancer Control Supplement of the 2015 National Health Intervi ...[more]

PMID: 31637870

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical screening trials have shown that sigmoidoscopy screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy has largely replaced sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening, but long-term results from randomized trials on colonoscopy screening are still lacking.ObjectiveTo estimate the additional screening benefit of colonoscopy compared with sigmoidoscopy.Design, setting, and participantsThis comparative effectiveness simulation study pooled data on 358 204 men and women randomly assigned to sigmoidoscopy screening or usual care in 4 randomized sigmoidoscopy screening trials conducted in Norway, Italy, the US, and UK with inclusion periods in the years 1993 to 2001. The primary analysis of the study was conducted from January 19 to December 30, 2021.InterventionInvitation to endoscopic screening.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality. Using pooled 15-year follow-up data, colonoscopy screening effectiveness was estimated assuming that the efficacy of colonoscopy in the proximal colon was similar to that observed in the distal colon in the sigmoidoscopy screening trials. The simulation model was validated using data from Norwegian participants in a colonoscopy screening trial.ResultsThis analysis included 358 204 individuals (181 971 women [51%]) aged 55 to 64 years at inclusion with a median follow-up time ranging from 15 to 17 years. Compared with usual care, colonoscopy prevented an estimated 50 (95% CI, 42-58) CRC cases per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 30% incidence reduction (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.66-0.75]), and prevented an estimated 15 (95% CI, 11-19) CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 32% mortality reduction (rate ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.61-0.76]). The additional benefit of colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy was 12 (95% CI, 10-14) fewer CRC cases and 4 (95% CI, 3-5) fewer CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to percentage point reductions of 6.9 (95% CI, 6.0-7.9) for CRC incidence and 7.6 (95% CI, 5.7-9.6) for CRC mortality. The number needed to switch from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy screening was 560 (95% CI, 486-661) to prevent 1 CRC case and 1611 (95% CI, 1275-2188) to prevent 1 CRC death.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this comparative effectiveness study assessing long-term follow-up after CRC screening suggest that there was an additional preventive effect on CRC incidence and mortality associated with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening, but the additional preventive effect was less than what was achieved by introducing sigmoidoscopy screening where no screening existed. The results probably represent the upper limit of what may be achieved with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening.

Project description:BackgroundLatinos have lower rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and later stage diagnosis than Whites, which may be partially explained by physician communication factors.ObjectiveWe assessed associations between patient-reported physician counseling regarding CRC screening and receipt of CRC screening among Latino primary care patients.DesignThis was a cross-sectional telephone survey.ParticipantsThe participants of this study were Latino primary care patients 50 years of age or older, with one or more visits during the preceding year.Main measuresWe developed patient-reported measures to assess whether physicians provided explanations of CRC risks and tests, elicited patients' barriers to CRC screening, were responsive to patients' concerns about screening, and encouraged patients to be screened. Outcomes were patient reports of receipt of endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) within recommended guidelines.Key resultsOf 817 eligible patients contacted, 505 (62 %) completed the survey; mean age was 61 years (SD 8.4), 69 % were women, and 53 % had less than high school education. Forty-six percent reported obtaining endoscopy (with or without FOBT), 13 % reported FOBT only, and 41 % reported no CRC screening. In bivariate analyses, physician explanations, elicitation of barriers, responsiveness to concerns, and greater encouragement for screening were associated with receipt of endoscopy (p < 0.001), and explanations (p < 0.05) and encouragement (p < 0.001) were associated with FOBT. Adjusting for covariates, physician explanations (OR = 1.27; 95 % CI 1.03, 1.58) and greater physician encouragement (OR = 6.74; 95 % CI 3.57, 12.72) were associated with endoscopy; patients reporting quite a bit/a lot of physician encouragement had six times higher odds of obtaining the FOBT as those reporting none/a little encouragement (OR = 6.54; 95 % CI 2.76, 15.48).ConclusionsAmong primarily lower-socioeconomic status Latino patients, the degree to which patients perceived that physicians encouraged CRC screening was more strongly associated with screening than with providing risk information, eliciting barriers, and responding to their concerns about screening.

Project description:Background/AimsSince 1993, the US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended screening to prevent colorectal cancer among average risk adults, beginning at age 50. Many studies over the past 20 years evaluated factors associated with screening uptake; however, few have focused on individuals who are newly eligible (i.e., those turning 50 years). We evaluated patient characteristics associated with uptake and time to initiation of colorectal cancer tests in a population newly-eligible for screening.MethodsThe study included 128,358 individuals who were members of an integrated care delivery system (Group Health) and enrolled on their 50th birthday from 1996–2011. We assessed receipt of colorectal cancer tests within 5 years of eligibility, and calculated the median time to first test. We examined patient characteristics associated with use of colorectal cancer tests overall using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsStool-based tests were most commonly used, with uptake ranging from 35–40% of the cohort across the study period. The proportion of individuals initiating colorectal cancer testing via colonoscopy increased from 3% in members becoming eligible in 1996–1998 to 21% in 2005–2007. Time to first test varied across test types. Median time to the first test was 3 months shorter in members who chose stool-based tests (25.2 months) compared to those who chose colonoscopy (28.2 months) among members newly eligible in 2005–2007. However, we observed no temporal changes in median time to first test, conditional on test type. Characteristics associated with increased uptake included more recent enrollment at age 50 (e.g., 2008–2010:HR = 2.16, 95% CI 2.09–2.23) and Asian background (HR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.05–1.11). Factors associated with reduced uptake included being a woman (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.91–0.94), African-American (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.91–0.99) or Pacific Islander (HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.76–0.96), diagnosed with diabetes (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.85–0.91) and being moderately or severely obese (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.81–0.85 and HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73–0.77, respectively).ConclusionsPatient characteristics associated with initiation of colorectal cancer testing in a newly eligible population are similar to previous findings among all-age eligible adults. Further, while the time to the first test remained stable, there was an increase in colorectal cancer testing during the study period.

Dataset Information

Physician-office vs home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible US adults.

Publications

Physician-office vs home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible US adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets