Patient Perceptions of Using Clinical Decision Support for Cancer Screening and Prevention: "I wouldn't have thought about getting screened without it."

Daniel M Saman, Melissa L Harry, Laura A Freitag, Clayton I Allen, Patrick J O'Connor, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Joseph A Bianco, Anjali R Truitt, Heidi L Ekstrom, Thomas E Elliott, Daniel M Saman, Melissa L Harry, Laura A Freitag, Clayton I Allen, Patrick J O'Connor, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Joseph A Bianco, Anjali R Truitt, Heidi L Ekstrom, Thomas E Elliott

Abstract

Purpose: We sought to gain an understanding of cancer prevention and screening perspectives among patients exposed to a clinical decision support (CDS) tool because they were due or overdue for certain cancer screenings or prevention.

Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 37 adult patients due or overdue for cancer prevention services in 10 primary care clinics within the same health system. Data were thematically segmented and coded using qualitative content analysis.

Results: We identified three themes: 1) The CDS tool had more strengths than weaknesses, with areas for improvement; 2) Many facilitators and barriers to cancer prevention and screening exist; and 3) Discussions and decision-making varied by type of cancer prevention and screening. Almost all participants made positive comments regarding the CDS. Some participants learned new information, reporting the CDS helped them make a decision they otherwise would not have made. Participants who used the tool with their provider had higher self-reported rates of deciding to be screened than those who did not.

Conclusions: Learning about patients' perceptions of a CDS tool may increase understanding of how patient-tailored CDS impacts cancer screening and prevention rates. Participants found a personalized CDS tool for cancer screening and prevention in primary care useful and a welcome addition to their visit. However, many providers were not using the tool with eligible patients.

Keywords: cancer prevention; cancer screening; clinical decision support; decision-making; primary care; qualitative research.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest None.

© 2021 Aurora Health Care, Inc.

References

    1. U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: data visualizations, based on 2019 submission data (1999–2017) released in June 2020. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; [Accessed February 12, 2021]. .
    1. Lentz R, Benson AB, 3rd, Kircher S. Financial toxicity in cancer care: prevalence, causes, consequences, and reduction strategies. J Surg Oncol. 2019;120:85–92. doi: 10.1002/jso.25374.
    1. Glode AE, May MB. Rising cost of cancer pharmaceuticals: cost issues and interventions to control costs. Pharmacotherapy. 2017;37:85–93. doi: 10.1002/phar.1867.
    1. Meites E, Kempe A, Markowitz LE. Use of a 2-dose schedule for human papillomavirus vaccination – updated recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65:1405–8. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6549a5.
    1. Moyer VA U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:330–8. doi: 10.7326/M13-2771.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Breast cancer: screening. [accessed February 12, 2021]. Published January 11, 2016. .
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Colorectal cancer: screening. [accessed February 12, 2021]. Published June 16, 2016. .
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Cervical cancer: screening. [accessed February 12, 2021]. Published August 21, 2018. .
    1. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81:1879–86. doi: 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879.
    1. National Cancer Institute. The Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. [Accessed May 13, 2021]. .
    1. Torke AM, Schwartz PH, Holtz LR, Montz K, Sachs GA. Older adults and forgoing cancer screening: “I think it would be strange”. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:526–31. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.2903.
    1. Carter-Harris L, Brandzel S, Wernli KJ, Roth JA, Buist DSM. A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening. Fam Pract. 2017;34:239–44. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw146.
    1. Sheridan SL, Harris RP, Woolf S. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention: a suggested approach from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:56–66. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2003.09.011.
    1. Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert GH, Sensky T, van der Staak CPF, de Jong CAJ. Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77:219–26. doi: 10.1159/000126073.
    1. Waldron T, Carr T, McMullen L, et al. Development of a program theory for shared decision-making: a realist synthesis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4649-1.
    1. Yahanda AT, Mozersky J. What’s the role of time in shared decision making? AMA J Ethics. 2020;22:E416–22. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.416.
    1. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4(4):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
    1. Trikalinos TA, Wieland LS, Adam GP, Zgodic A, Ntzani EE. Decision aids for cancer screening and treatment [internet] Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2014. Dec, comparative effectiveness reviews no. 145, report no. 15-EHC002-EF.
    1. Berner ES. Clinical decision support systems: state of the art. [accessed February 12, 2021]. [Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality publication no. 09-0069-EF]. Published June 2009. .
    1. Osheroff JA, Teich JM, Levick D, et al. Improving Outcomes With Clinical Decision Support: An Implementer’s Guide, Second Edition. CRC Press; 2012.
    1. Harry ML, Truitt AR, Saman DM, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing cancer prevention clinical decision support in primary care: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):534. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4326-4.
    1. Saman DM, Walton KM, Harry ML, et al. Understanding primary care providers’ perceptions of cancer prevention and screening in a predominantly rural healthcare system in the upper Midwest. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1019. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4872-9.
    1. Elliott TE, O’Connor PJ, Asche SE, et al. Design and rationale of an intervention to improve cancer prevention using clinical decision support and shared decision making: a clinic-randomized trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2021;102 doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106271. 106271.
    1. McAlpine K, Lavallée LT, Stacey D, et al. Development and acceptability testing of a patient decision aid for urinary diversion with radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2019;202:1001–7. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000341.
    1. Honein-AbouHaidar GN, Kastner M, Vuong V, et al. Systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies evaluating facilitators and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2016;25:907–17. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0990.
    1. Peterson EB, Ostroff JS, DuHamel KN, et al. Impact of provider-patient communication on cancer screening adherence: a systematic review. Prev Med. 2016;93:96–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.09.034.
    1. Bhuyan SS, Chandak A, Gupta N, et al. Patient-provider communication about prostate cancer screening and treatment: new evidence from the health information national trends survey. Am J Mens Health. 2017;11:134–46. doi: 10.1177/1557988315614082.
    1. Dunn AS, Shridharani KV, Lou W, Bernstein J, Horowitz CR. Physician-patient discussions of controversial cancer screening tests. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20:130–4. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00288-9.
    1. Guerra CE, Jacobs SE, Holmes JH, Shea JA. Are physicians discussing prostate cancer screening with their patients and why or why not? A pilot study. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:901–7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0142-3.
    1. Han PKJ, Kobrin S, Breen N, et al. National evidence on the use of shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening. Ann Fam Med. 2013;11:306–14. doi: 10.1370/afm.1539.
    1. Harry ML, Saman DM, Truitt AR, et al. Pre-implementation adaptation of primary care cancer prevention clinical decision support in a predominantly rural healthcare system. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020;20(1):117. doi: 10.1370/afm.1539.
    1. Kwon HT, Ma GX, Gold RS, Atkinson NL, Wang MQ. Primary care physicians’ cancer screening recommendation practices and perceptions of cancer risk of Asian Americans. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14:1999–2004. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.3.1999.
    1. Brenner AT, Malo TL, Margolis M, et al. Evaluating shared decision making for lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178:1311–6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3054.
    1. Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30:53S–64S. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10378701.
    1. Légaré F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013;32:276–84. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1078.
    1. Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: What will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract. 1998;1:2–4.
    1. Sperl-Hillen JM, Rossom RC, Kharbanda EO, et al. Priorities Wizard: multisite web-based primary care clinical decision support improved chronic care outcomes with high use rates and high clinician satisfaction rates. EGEMS (Wash DC) 2019;7(1):9. doi: 10.5334/egems.284.
    1. Sperl-Hillen JM, Crain AL, Margolis KL, et al. Clinical decision support directed to primary care patients and providers reduces cardiovascular risk: a randomized trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25:1137–46. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy085.
    1. O’Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Rush WA, et al. Impact of electronic health record clinical decision support on diabetes care: a randomized trial. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9:12–21. doi: 10.1370/afm.1196.
    1. Spratt JS. The primary and secondary prevention of cancer. J Surg Oncol. 1981;18:219–30. doi: 10.1002/jso.2930180302.
    1. Researchware, Inc. HyperRESEARCH 4.5.0 software. [Accessed February 12, 2021]. .
    1. Schreier M. Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice, 1st Edition. SAGE Publications; 2012.
    1. Simmons VN, Gray JE, Schabath MB, Wilson LE, Quinn GP. High-risk community and primary care providers knowledge about and barriers to low-dose computed topography lung cancer screening. Lung Cancer. 2017;106:42–9. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.01.012.
    1. Bodenheimer T, Willard-Grace R, Ghorob A. Expanding the roles of medical assistants: Who does what in primary care? JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1025–6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1319.
    1. Krelle H, Dodson JA, Horwitz L. Virtual primary care – is its expansion due to COVID-19 all upside? JAMA Health Forum. 2020;1(7):e200900. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2020.0900.
    1. Eichner J, Das M NORC at the University of Chicago. Challenges and barriers to clinical decision support (CDS) design and implementation experienced in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality CDS Demonstrations. [accessed February 12, 2021]. [AHRQ publication no. 10-0064-EF]. Published March 2010. .

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj