The effect of offering different numbers of colorectal cancer screening test options in a decision aid: a pilot randomized trial
- PMID: 18218084
- PMCID: PMC2259331
- DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-4
The effect of offering different numbers of colorectal cancer screening test options in a decision aid: a pilot randomized trial
Abstract
Background: Decision aids can improve decision making processes, but the amount and type of information that they should attempt to communicate is controversial. We sought to compare, in a pilot randomized trial, two colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision aids that differed in the number of screening options presented.
Methods: Adults ages 48-75 not currently up to date with screening were recruited from the community and randomized to view one of two versions of our previously tested CRC screening decision aid. The first version included five screening options: fecal occult blood test (FOBT), sigmoidoscopy, a combination of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and barium enema. The second discussed only the two most frequently selected screening options, FOBT and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were differences in screening interest and test preferences between groups after decision aid viewing. Patient test preference was elicited first without any associated out-of-pocket costs (OPC), and then with the following costs: FOBT-$10, sigmoidoscopy-$50, barium enema-$50, and colonoscopy-$200.
Results: 62 adults participated: 25 viewed the 5-option decision aid, and 37 viewed the 2-option version. Mean age was 54 (range 48-72), 58% were women, 71% were White, 24% African-American; 58% had completed at least a 4-year college degree. Comparing participants that viewed the 5-option version with participants who viewed the 2-option version, there were no differences in screening interest after viewing (1.8 vs. 1.9, t-test p = 0.76). Those viewing the 2-option version were somewhat more likely to choose colonoscopy than those viewing the 5-option version when no out of pocket costs were assumed (68% vs. 46%, p = 0.11), but not when such costs were imposed (41% vs. 42%, p = 1.00).
Conclusion: The number of screening options available does not appear to have a large effect on interest in colorectal cancer screening. The effect of offering differing numbers of options may affect test choice when out-of-pocket costs are not considered.
Similar articles
-
Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening.J Fam Pract. 1997 Sep;45(3):211-8. J Fam Pract. 1997. PMID: 9300000
-
Cancer screening before and after switching to a high-deductible health plan.Ann Intern Med. 2008 May 6;148(9):647-55. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-9-200805060-00004. Ann Intern Med. 2008. PMID: 18458277
-
A randomized trial of direct mailing of fecal occult blood tests to increase colorectal cancer screening.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 May 19;96(10):770-80. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djh134. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004. PMID: 15150305 Clinical Trial.
-
Options for screening for colorectal cancer.Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 2003;(237):13-6. doi: 10.1080/00855910310001421. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 2003. PMID: 12797674 Review.
-
Screening for Colorectal Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Oct. Report No.: 08-05-05124-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Oct. Report No.: 08-05-05124-EF-1. PMID: 20722162 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
What is lacking in current decision aids on cancer screening?CA Cancer J Clin. 2013 May;63(3):193-214. doi: 10.3322/caac.21180. Epub 2013 Mar 15. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013. PMID: 23504675 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Behind closed doors: physician-patient discussions about colorectal cancer screening.J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Nov;24(11):1228-35. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1108-4. Epub 2009 Sep 18. J Gen Intern Med. 2009. PMID: 19763699 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Bringing an organizational perspective to the optimal number of colorectal cancer screening options debate.J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Mar;27(3):376-80. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1870-y. Epub 2011 Sep 14. J Gen Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 21915765 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparative Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Cancer-Screening Decision Making: An Overview of Reviews.J Gen Intern Med. 2024 Dec;39(16):3299-3314. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-09001-4. Epub 2024 Sep 4. J Gen Intern Med. 2024. PMID: 39230806 Review.
-
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 29;1(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38284415 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Increased use of colorectal cancer tests – United States, 2002 and 2004. Mmwr. 2006;55:308–311. - PubMed
-
- Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendation and rationale. Annals of internal medicine. 2002;137:129–131. - PubMed
-
- Kim J, Whitney A, Hayter S, Lewis C, Campbell M, Sutherland L, Fowler B, Googe S, McCoy R, Pignone M. Development and initial testing of a computer-based patient decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening for primary care practice. BMC medical informatics and decision making. 2005;5:36. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-5-36. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Pignone M, Harris R, Kinsinger L. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening. A randomized, controlled trial. Annals of internal medicine. 2000;133:761–769. - PubMed
-
- Schwartz B. The Paradox of Choice: why more is less. HarperCollins. 2004.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical