RetroSearch Browse

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17823463/ below:

Why hasn't this patient been screened for colon cancer? An Iowa Research Network study

Multicenter Study

. 2007 Sep-Oct;20(5):458-68. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.05.070058. Why hasn't this patient been screened for colon cancer? An Iowa Research Network study

Affiliations

Affiliation

¹ Department of Family Medicine, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA. barcey-levy@uiowa.edu

PMID: 17823463
DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.05.070058

Free article

Item in Clipboard

Multicenter Study

Why hasn't this patient been screened for colon cancer? An Iowa Research Network study

Barcey T Levy et al. J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Sep-Oct.

Free article . 2007 Sep-Oct;20(5):458-68. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.05.070058. Affiliation

¹ Department of Family Medicine, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA. barcey-levy@uiowa.edu

PMID: 17823463
DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.05.070058

Item in Clipboard

Abstract

Background: Less than half of eligible Americans have been screened for colorectal cancer (CRC). The objective of this study was to describe physicians' reasons for screening or not screening specific patients for CRC and their approach to CRC testing discussions.

Methods: This study used mixed-methods. Physicians described their reasons for screening or not screening 6 randomly chosen patients who were eligible for CRC screening (3 screened and 3 not screened) whose CRC testing status was ascertained by medical record review. Verbatim transcripts from physicians responding to structured interview questions were used to identify themes. Specific elements of discussion were examined for their association with each physician's screening rate. Fifteen randomly chosen Iowa family physicians from the Iowa Research Network stratified by privileges to perform colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or neither procedure dictated the reasons why 43 patients were screened and 40 patients were not screened.

Results: Reasons patients were not up to date fell into 2 major categories: (1) no discussion by physician (50%) and (2) patient refusal (43%). Reasons for no discussion included lack of opportunity, assessment that cost would be prohibitive, distraction by other life issues/health problems, physician forgetfulness, and expected patient refusal. Patients declined because of cost, lack of interest, autonomy, other life issues, fear of screening, and lack of symptoms. Patients who were up to date received (1) diagnostic testing (for previous colon pathology or symptoms; 56%) or (2) asymptomatic screening (44%). Physicians who were more adamant about screening had higher screening rates (P<.05; Wilcoxon rank sum). Physicians framed their recommendations differently ("I recommend" vs "They recommend"), with lower screening rates among physicians who used "they recommend" (P=.05; Wilcoxon rank sum).

Conclusions: Reasons many patients remain unscreened for CRC include (1) factors related to the health care system, patient, and physician that impede or prevent discussion; (2) patient refusal; and (3) the focus on diagnostic testing. Strategies to improve screening might include patient and physician education about the rationale for screening, universal coverage for health maintenance exams, and development of effective tracking and reminder systems. The words physicians choose to frame their recommendations are important and should be explored further.

PubMed Disclaimer