Cargando…
Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study
Introduction. Discussions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with older adults should be individualized to maximize appropriate screening. Our aim was to describe CRC screening discussions and explore their associations with patient characteristics and screening intentions. Methods. Cross-sectiona...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157429/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30288441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318765172 |
_version_ | 1783358270323294208 |
---|---|
author | Kistler, Christine E. Golin, Carol Sundaram, Anupama Morris, Carolyn Dalton, Alexandra F. Ferrari, Renee Lewis, Carmen L. |
author_facet | Kistler, Christine E. Golin, Carol Sundaram, Anupama Morris, Carolyn Dalton, Alexandra F. Ferrari, Renee Lewis, Carmen L. |
author_sort | Kistler, Christine E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction. Discussions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with older adults should be individualized to maximize appropriate screening. Our aim was to describe CRC screening discussions and explore their associations with patient characteristics and screening intentions. Methods. Cross-sectional survey of 422 primary care patients aged ≥70 years and eligible for CRC screening, including open-ended questions about CRC screening discussions. Primary outcomes were the frequency with which CRC screening discussions occurred, who had those discussions, and the domains that emerged from thematic analysis of participants’ brief reports of their discussions. We also examined the associations between 1) patient characteristics and whether a screening discussion occurred and 2) the domains discussed and what screening decisions were made. Results. Of 422 participants, 209 reported having discussions and 201 responded to open-ended questions about CRC discussions. In a regression analysis, several factors were associated with increased odds of having a discussion: participants’ preference to pursue screening (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3, 3.9), good health (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7, 4.8), and receipt of the decision aid (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4, 3.2). Our thematic analysis identified five domains related to discussion content and three related to discussion process. The CRC screening–related information domain was the most commonly discussed content domain, and the timing/frequency domain was associated with increased odds of intent to pursue screening. Decision-making role, the most commonly discussed process domain, was associated with increased odds of the intent to forgo CRC screening. Conclusions and Relevance. CRC screening discussions varied by type of participant and content. Future work is needed to determine if interventions focused on specific domains alters the appropriateness of participants’ colorectal cancer screening intentions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6157429 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61574292018-10-04 Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study Kistler, Christine E. Golin, Carol Sundaram, Anupama Morris, Carolyn Dalton, Alexandra F. Ferrari, Renee Lewis, Carmen L. MDM Policy Pract Original Article Introduction. Discussions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with older adults should be individualized to maximize appropriate screening. Our aim was to describe CRC screening discussions and explore their associations with patient characteristics and screening intentions. Methods. Cross-sectional survey of 422 primary care patients aged ≥70 years and eligible for CRC screening, including open-ended questions about CRC screening discussions. Primary outcomes were the frequency with which CRC screening discussions occurred, who had those discussions, and the domains that emerged from thematic analysis of participants’ brief reports of their discussions. We also examined the associations between 1) patient characteristics and whether a screening discussion occurred and 2) the domains discussed and what screening decisions were made. Results. Of 422 participants, 209 reported having discussions and 201 responded to open-ended questions about CRC discussions. In a regression analysis, several factors were associated with increased odds of having a discussion: participants’ preference to pursue screening (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3, 3.9), good health (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7, 4.8), and receipt of the decision aid (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4, 3.2). Our thematic analysis identified five domains related to discussion content and three related to discussion process. The CRC screening–related information domain was the most commonly discussed content domain, and the timing/frequency domain was associated with increased odds of intent to pursue screening. Decision-making role, the most commonly discussed process domain, was associated with increased odds of the intent to forgo CRC screening. Conclusions and Relevance. CRC screening discussions varied by type of participant and content. Future work is needed to determine if interventions focused on specific domains alters the appropriateness of participants’ colorectal cancer screening intentions. SAGE Publications 2018-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6157429/ /pubmed/30288441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318765172 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Kistler, Christine E. Golin, Carol Sundaram, Anupama Morris, Carolyn Dalton, Alexandra F. Ferrari, Renee Lewis, Carmen L. Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title | Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title_full | Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title_fullStr | Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title_short | Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study |
title_sort | individualized colorectal cancer screening discussions between older adults and their primary care providers: a cross-sectional study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157429/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30288441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318765172 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kistlerchristinee individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT golincarol individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT sundaramanupama individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT morriscarolyn individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT daltonalexandraf individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT ferrarirenee individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy AT lewiscarmenl individualizedcolorectalcancerscreeningdiscussionsbetweenolderadultsandtheirprimarycareprovidersacrosssectionalstudy |