Cargando…

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fideli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brenner, Alison T., Rohweder, Catherine L., Wangen, Mary, Atkins, Dana L., Ceballos, Rachel M., Correa, Sara, Ferrari, Renée M., Issaka, Rachel B., Ittes, Annika, Odebunmi, Olufeyisayo O., Reuland, Daniel S., Waters, Austin R., Wheeler, Stephanie B., Shah, Parth D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463525/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37612656
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09828-3
_version_ 1785098252983468032
author Brenner, Alison T.
Rohweder, Catherine L.
Wangen, Mary
Atkins, Dana L.
Ceballos, Rachel M.
Correa, Sara
Ferrari, Renée M.
Issaka, Rachel B.
Ittes, Annika
Odebunmi, Olufeyisayo O.
Reuland, Daniel S.
Waters, Austin R.
Wheeler, Stephanie B.
Shah, Parth D.
author_facet Brenner, Alison T.
Rohweder, Catherine L.
Wangen, Mary
Atkins, Dana L.
Ceballos, Rachel M.
Correa, Sara
Ferrari, Renée M.
Issaka, Rachel B.
Ittes, Annika
Odebunmi, Olufeyisayo O.
Reuland, Daniel S.
Waters, Austin R.
Wheeler, Stephanie B.
Shah, Parth D.
author_sort Brenner, Alison T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fidelity in primary care. Given limited patient visit time and competing demands, primary care providers (PCPs) tend to prioritize a small subset of these recommendations. Completion rates of some of these services, including CRC screening, are suboptimal. Expanding delivery of preventive services to other healthcare providers, where possible, can improve access and uptake, particularly in medically underserved areas or populations. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (at-home, stool-based testing) for CRC screening can be distributed and resulted without PCP involvement. Pharmacists have long delivered preventive services (e.g., influenza vaccination) and may be a good option for expanding CRC screening delivery using FIT, but it is not clear how PCPs would perceive this expansion. METHODS: We used semi-structured interviews with PCPs in North Carolina and Washington state to assess perceptions and recommendations for a potential pharmacy-based FIT distribution program (PharmFIT™). Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to elucidate potential multi-level facilitators of and barriers to implementation of PharmFIT™. RESULTS: We completed 30 interviews with PCPs in North Carolina (N = 12) and Washington state (N = 18). PCPs in both states were largely accepting of PharmFIT™, with several important considerations. First, PCPs felt that pharmacists should receive appropriate training for identifying patients eligible and due for FIT screening. Second, a clear understanding of responsibility for tracking tests, communication, and, particularly, follow-up of positive test results should be established and followed. Finally, clear electronic workflows should be established for relay of test result information between the pharmacy and the primary care clinic. CONCLUSION: If the conditions are met regarding pharmacist training, follow-up for positive FITs, and transfer of documentation, PCPs are likely to support PharmFIT™ as a way for their patients to obtain and complete CRC screening using FIT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-09828-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10463525
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104635252023-08-30 Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study Brenner, Alison T. Rohweder, Catherine L. Wangen, Mary Atkins, Dana L. Ceballos, Rachel M. Correa, Sara Ferrari, Renée M. Issaka, Rachel B. Ittes, Annika Odebunmi, Olufeyisayo O. Reuland, Daniel S. Waters, Austin R. Wheeler, Stephanie B. Shah, Parth D. BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fidelity in primary care. Given limited patient visit time and competing demands, primary care providers (PCPs) tend to prioritize a small subset of these recommendations. Completion rates of some of these services, including CRC screening, are suboptimal. Expanding delivery of preventive services to other healthcare providers, where possible, can improve access and uptake, particularly in medically underserved areas or populations. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (at-home, stool-based testing) for CRC screening can be distributed and resulted without PCP involvement. Pharmacists have long delivered preventive services (e.g., influenza vaccination) and may be a good option for expanding CRC screening delivery using FIT, but it is not clear how PCPs would perceive this expansion. METHODS: We used semi-structured interviews with PCPs in North Carolina and Washington state to assess perceptions and recommendations for a potential pharmacy-based FIT distribution program (PharmFIT™). Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to elucidate potential multi-level facilitators of and barriers to implementation of PharmFIT™. RESULTS: We completed 30 interviews with PCPs in North Carolina (N = 12) and Washington state (N = 18). PCPs in both states were largely accepting of PharmFIT™, with several important considerations. First, PCPs felt that pharmacists should receive appropriate training for identifying patients eligible and due for FIT screening. Second, a clear understanding of responsibility for tracking tests, communication, and, particularly, follow-up of positive test results should be established and followed. Finally, clear electronic workflows should be established for relay of test result information between the pharmacy and the primary care clinic. CONCLUSION: If the conditions are met regarding pharmacist training, follow-up for positive FITs, and transfer of documentation, PCPs are likely to support PharmFIT™ as a way for their patients to obtain and complete CRC screening using FIT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-09828-3. BioMed Central 2023-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10463525/ /pubmed/37612656 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09828-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Brenner, Alison T.
Rohweder, Catherine L.
Wangen, Mary
Atkins, Dana L.
Ceballos, Rachel M.
Correa, Sara
Ferrari, Renée M.
Issaka, Rachel B.
Ittes, Annika
Odebunmi, Olufeyisayo O.
Reuland, Daniel S.
Waters, Austin R.
Wheeler, Stephanie B.
Shah, Parth D.
Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title_full Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title_short Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
title_sort primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463525/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37612656
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09828-3
work_keys_str_mv AT brenneralisont primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT rohwedercatherinel primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT wangenmary primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT atkinsdanal primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT ceballosrachelm primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT correasara primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT ferrarireneem primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT issakarachelb primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT ittesannika primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT odebunmiolufeyisayoo primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT reulanddaniels primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT watersaustinr primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT wheelerstephanieb primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy
AT shahparthd primarycareproviderperspectivesontheroleofcommunitypharmacyincolorectalcancerscreeningaqualitativestudy