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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Dec;30(12):1780-7.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-015-3381-8. Epub 2015 May 19.

The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients

Nancy C Dolan et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Physician recommendation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a critical facilitator of screening completion. Providing patients a choice of screening options may increase CRC screening completion, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities.

Objective: Our purpose was to assess the effectiveness of physician-only and physician-patient interventions on increasing rates of CRC screening discussions as compared to usual care.

Design: This study was quasi-experimental. Clinics were allocated to intervention or usual care; patients in intervention clinics were randomized to receipt of patient intervention.

Participants: Patients aged 50 to 75 years, due for CRC screening, receiving care at either a federally qualified health care center or an academic health center participated in the study.

Intervention: Intervention physicians received continuous quality improvement and communication skills training. Intervention patients watched an educational video immediately before their appointment.

Main measures: Rates of patient-reported 1) CRC screening discussions, and 2) discussions of more than one screening test.

Key results: The physician-patient intervention (n = 167) resulted in higher rates of CRC screening discussions compared to both physician-only intervention (n = 183; 61.1 % vs.50.3 %, p = 0.008) and usual care (n = 153; 61.1 % vs. 34.0 % p = 0.03). More discussions of specific CRC screening tests and discussions of more than one test occurred in the intervention arms than in usual care (44.6 % vs. 22.9 %,p = 0.03) and (5.1 % vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.036), respectively, but discussion of more than one test was uncommon. Across all arms, 143 patients (28.4 %) reported discussion of colonoscopy only; 21 (4.2 %) reported discussion of both colonoscopy and stool tests.

Conclusions: Compared to usual care and a physician-only intervention, a physician-patient intervention increased rates of CRC screening discussions, yet discussions overwhelmingly focused solely on colonoscopy. In underserved patient populations where access to colonoscopy may be limited, interventions encouraging discussions of both stool tests and colonoscopy may be needed.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01103479.

Keywords: colorectal cancer screening; health literacy; physician communication of preventive care; randomized trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Participant recruitment and flow chart.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures −2015. Available at : http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@editorial/documents/document/a... Accessed April 16, 2015.
    1. Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Liles E, Beil TL, Fu R. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systemic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:638–658. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-9-200811040-00245. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328(19):1365–1371. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199305133281901. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996;348(9040):1472–1477. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)03386-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. 1996;348(9040):1467–1471. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)03430-7. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data