Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Older Adults

Author:

Dalton Alexandra F.1,Golin Carol E.234,Morris Carolyn5,Kistler Christine E.6,Dolor Rowena J.7,Bertin Kaitlyn B.8,Suresh Krithika9,Patel Swati G.1011,Lewis Carmen L.1

Affiliation:

1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora

2. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

3. Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

4. Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Health Behavior, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

5. Division of Data Sciences Safety and Regulatory, Division of Biostatistics, Department of Research & Development Solutions, IQVIA, Durham, North Carolina

6. Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

7. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

8. Adult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora

9. Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora

10. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora

11. Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado

Abstract

ImportanceGuidelines recommend individualized decision-making for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults aged 76 to 84 years, a process that includes a consideration of health state and patient preference.ObjectiveTo determine whether a targeted patient decision aid would align older adults’ screening preference with their potential to benefit from CRC screening.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis is a prespecified secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial. Participants aged 70 to 84 years who were not up to date with screening and had an appointment within 6 weeks were purposively sampled by health state (poor, intermediate, or good) at 14 community-based primary care practices and block randomized to receive the intervention or control. Patients were recruited from March 1, 2012, to February 28, 2015, and these secondary analyses were performed from January 15 to March 1, 2022.InterventionsPatient decision aid targeted to age and sex.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome of this analysis was patient preference for CRC screening. The a priori hypothesis was that the decision aid (intervention) group would reduce the proportion preferring screening among those in poor and intermediate health compared with the control group.ResultsAmong the 424 participants, the mean (SD) age was 76.8 (4.2) years; 248 (58.5%) of participants were women; and 333 (78.5%) were White. The proportion preferring screening in the intervention group was less than in the control group for those in the intermediate health state (34 of 76 [44.7%] vs 40 of 73 [54.8%]; absolute difference, −10.1% [95% CI, −26.0% to 5.9%]) and in the poor health state (24 of 62 [38.7%] vs 33 of 61 [54.1%]; absolute difference, −15.4% [95% CI, −32.8% to 2.0%]). These differences were not statistically significant. The proportion of those in good health who preferred screening was similar between the intervention and control groups (44 of 74 [59.5%] for intervention vs 46 of 75 [61.3%] for control; absolute difference, −1.9% [95% CI, −17.6% to 13.8%]).Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings of this secondary analysis of a clinical trial did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in patient preferences between the health groups. Additional studies that are appropriately powered are needed to determine the effect of the decision aid on the preferences of older patients for CRC screening by health state.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01575990

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3