Understanding primary care providers' perceptions of cancer prevention and screening in a predominantly rural healthcare system in the upper Midwest

Daniel M Saman, Kayla M Walton, Melissa L Harry, Stephen E Asche, Anjali R Truitt, Hillary A Henzler-Buckingham, Clayton I Allen, Heidi L Ekstrom, Patrick J O'Connor, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Joseph A Bianco, Thomas E Elliott, Daniel M Saman, Kayla M Walton, Melissa L Harry, Stephen E Asche, Anjali R Truitt, Hillary A Henzler-Buckingham, Clayton I Allen, Heidi L Ekstrom, Patrick J O'Connor, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Joseph A Bianco, Thomas E Elliott

Abstract

Background: Cancer is the leading cause of death in the United States, with the burden expected to rise in the coming decades, increasing the need for effective cancer prevention and screening options. The United States Preventive Services Task Force has suggested that a shared decision-making process be used when clinicians and patients discuss cancer screening. The electronic medical record (EMR) often provides only reminders or alerts to primary care providers (PCPs) when screenings are due, a strategy with limited efficacy.

Methods: We administered a cross-sectional electronic survey to PCPs (n = 165, 53% response rate) at 36 Essentia Health primary care clinics participating in a large, National Cancer Institute-funded study on a cancer prevention clinical decision support (CDS) tool. The survey assessed PCP demographics, perceptions of the EMR's ability to help assess and manage patients' cancer risk, and experience and comfort level discussing cancer screening and prevention with patients.

Results: In these predominantly rural clinics, only 49% of PCPs thought the EMR was well integrated to help assess and manage cancer risk. Both advanced care practitioners and physicians agreed that cancer screening and informed discussion of cancer risks are important; however, only 53% reported their patients gave cancer screening a high priority relative to other health issues.

Conclusions: The impact of EMR-linked CDS delivered to both patients and PCPs may improve cancer screening, but only if it is easy to use and saves PCPs time.

Keywords: Cancer prevention; Cancer screening; Clinical decision support; Electronic medical record; Primary care provider.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108. doi: 10.3322/caac.21262.
    1. Popat K, McQueen K, Feeley TW. The global burden of cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2013;27(4):399–408. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2013.10.010.
    1. Peterson EB, Ostroff JS, DuHamel KN, D'Agostino TA, Hernandez M, Canzona MR, 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. Platz EA. Reducing cancer burden in the population: an overview of epidemiologic evidence to support policies, systems, and environmental changes. Epidemiol Rev. 2017;39(1):1–10. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxx009.
    1. Lafata JE, Cooper G, Divine G, Oja-Tebbe N, Flocke SA. Patient-physician colorectal cancer screening discussion content and patients' use of colorectal cancer screening. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(1):76–82. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.09.008.
    1. Sheridan SL, Harris RP, Woolf SH. Shared decision-making workgroup of the USPSTF. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention: a suggested approach from the U.S. preventive services task force. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26(1):56–66. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2003.09.011.
    1. Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert GH, Sensky T, van der Staak CP, de Jong CA. Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77(4):219–226. doi: 10.1159/000126073.
    1. Legare F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013;32(2):276–284. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1078.
    1. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ. 2005;330(7494):765. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38398.500764.8F.
    1. Bright TJ, Wong A, Dhurjati R, Bristow E, Bastian L, Coeytaux RR, et al. Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(1):29–43. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-1-201207030-00450.
    1. Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano MP, Devereaux PJ, Beyene J, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1223–1238. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1223.
    1. Medlock S, Wyatt JC, Patel VL, Shortliffe EH, Abu-Hanna A. Modeling information flows in clinical decision support: key insights for enhancing system effectiveness. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016;23(5):1001–1006. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocv177.
    1. Roshanov PS, Fernandes N, Wilczynski JM, Hemens BJ, You JJ, Handler SM, et al. Features of effective computerised clinical decision support systems: meta-regression of 162 randomised trials. BMJ. 2013;346:f657. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f657.
    1. Bhuyan SS, Chandak A, Gupta N, Isharwal S, LaGrange C, Mahmood A, 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(1):134–146. 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(2):130–134. 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(7):901–907. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0142-3.
    1. Han PK, Kobrin S, Breen N, Joseph DA, Li J, Frosch DL, et al. National evidence on the use of shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening. Ann Fam Med. 2013;11(4):306–314. doi: 10.1370/afm.1539.
    1. Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, Couper MP, Barry MJ, Elmore JG, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(5 Suppl):53S–64S. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10378701.
    1. Bryan TJ, Estrada CA, Castiglioni A, Snyder ED. Impact of an educational intervention on provider knowledge, attitudes, and comfort level regarding counseling women ages 40-49 about breast cancer screening. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2015;8:209–216. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S80337.
    1. National Cancer Institute (2018). National survey of primary care physicians’ recommendations & practice for breast, cervical, colorectal, & lung cancer screening. Retrieved from .
    1. Brooke J. SUS: a ‘quick and dirty’ usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland AL, editors. Usability evaluation in industry. London: Taylor and Francis; 1996.
    1. SAS Instititute Inc. (2013). Version 9.4. Cary, North Carolina, USA.
    1. Sifri Randa, Salzman Brooke, Cunningham Amy, Silverio Alexis, Zale Madalene, Talerico Christine. Primary Care Providers' Attitudes and Practices Regarding Cancer Screening in Older Adults. Population Health Management. 2019;22(4):315–320. doi: 10.1089/pop.2018.0125.
    1. Harry ML, Truitt AR, Saman DM, Henzler-Buckingham HA, Allen CI, Walton KM, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing cancer prevention clinical decision support in primary care: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:534. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4326-4.
    1. Caverly TJ, Hayward RA, Burke JF. Much to do with nothing: microsimulation study on time management in primary care. BMJ. 2018;363:k4983. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4983.
    1. Yarnall KS, Pollak KI, Ostbye T, Krause KM, Michener JL. Primary care: is there enough time for prevention? Am J Public Health. 2003;93(4):635–641. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.93.4.635.
    1. MN Community Measurement. (2017). Data Files, Analytics and Reports. Retrieved from
    1. Sperl-Hillen JM, Rossom RC, Kharbanda EO, Gold R, Geissal ED, Elliott TE, Desai JR, Rindal DB, Saman DM, Waring SC, Margolis KL, O’Connor PJ. Priorities wizard: multisite web-based primary care clinical decision support improved chronic care outcomes with high use rates and high clinician satisfaction rates. eGems. 2019;7(1):9. doi: 10.5334/egems.284.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅