Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Nov-Dec;25(6):782-91.
doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2012.06.110254.

Physician recommendation and patient adherence for colorectal cancer screening

Shawna V Hudson  1 , Jeanne M Ferrante, Pamela Ohman-Strickland, Karissa A Hahn, Eric K Shaw, Jennifer Hemler, Benjamin F Crabtree
Affiliations

Physician recommendation and patient adherence for colorectal cancer screening

Shawna V Hudson et al. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012 Nov-Dec.

Abstract

Background: Physician recommendation is one of the strongest, most consistent predictors of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Little is known regarding characteristics associated with patient adherence to physician recommendations in community and academic based primary care settings.

Methods: Data were analyzed from 975 patients, aged ≥50 years, recruited from 25 primary care practices in New Jersey. Chi-square and generalized estimate equation analyses determined independent correlates of receipt of and adherence to physician recommendation for CRC.

Results: Patients reported high screening rates for CRC (59%). More than three fourths of patients reported either screening or having received a screening recommendation (82%). Men (P = .0425), nonsmokers (P = .0029), and patients who were highly educated (P = .0311) were more likely to receive a CRC screening recommendation. Patients more adhere to CRC screening recommendations were older adults (P < .0001), nonsmokers (P = .0005), those who were more highly educated (P = .0365), Hispanics (P = .0325), and those who were married (P < .0001).

Conclusions: Community and academic primary care clinicians appropriately recommended screening to high-risk patients with familial risk factors. However, they less frequently recommended screening to others (ie, women and smokers) also likely to benefit. To further increase CRC screening, clinicians must systematically recommend screening to all patients who may benefit.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement: No relationship exists between any of the authors and any commercial entity or product mentioned in this article that might represent a conflict of interest. No inducements have been made by any commercial entity to submit this manuscript for publication.

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010 Sep-Oct;60(5):277–300. - PubMed
    1. U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2008 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2012.
    1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012 Jan-Feb;62(1):10–29. - PubMed
    1. American Cancer Society. Colorectal Cancer Facts & Figures 2011–2013. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2011.
    1. Mandel JS, Church TR, Bond JH, et al. The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000 Nov 30;343(22):1603–1607. - PubMed

Publication types