» Articles » PMID: 19139323

Physicians Encouraging Colorectal Screening: a Randomized Controlled Trial of Enhanced Office and Patient Management on Compliance with Colorectal Cancer Screening

Overview
Journal Arch Intern Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2009 Jan 14
PMID 19139323
Citations 39
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Colorectal cancer screening is underused. Our objective was to evaluate methods for promoting colorectal cancer screening in primary care practice.

Methods: A 2 x 2 factorial randomized clinical trial measured the effects of a tailored vs nontailored physician recommendation letter and an enhanced vs nonenhanced physician office and patient management intervention on colorectal cancer screening adherence. The enhanced and nonenhanced physician office and patient management interventions varied the amount of external support to help physician offices develop and implement colorectal cancer screening programs. The study included 10 primary care physician office practices and 599 screen-eligible patients aged 50 to 79 years. The primary end point was medical-record-verified flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. Statistical end-point analysis (according to randomization intent) used generalized estimating equations to account for correlated outcomes according to physician group.

Results: During a 1-year period, endoscopy in the lower gastrointestinal tract (lower endoscopy) occurred in 289 of 599 patients (48.2%). This finding included the following rates of lower endoscopy: 81 of 152 patients (53.3%) in the group that received the tailored letter and enhanced management; 103 of 190 (54.2%) in the group that received the nontailored letter and enhanced management; 58 of 133 (43.6%) in the group that received the tailored letter and nonenhanced management; and 47 of 124 (37.9%) in the group that received the nontailored letter and nonenhanced management. Enhanced office and patient management increased the odds of completing a colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy by 1.63-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.41; P = .01). However, the tailored letter increased the odds of completion by only 1.08-fold (95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.62; P = .71).

Conclusions: Approximately one-half of the screen-eligible primary medical care patients aged 50 to 79 years obtained lower endoscopic colorectal cancer screening within 1 year of recommendation. An enhanced office and patient management system significantly improved colorectal cancer screening adherence.

Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00327457.

Citing Articles

Community Health workers United to Reduce Colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease among people at Higher risk (CHURCH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Williams O, Ting T, Matthews L, Block G, Block T, Teresi J Trials. 2024; 25(1):283.

PMID: 38671470 PMC: 11046862. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08110-z.


Community Health workers United to Reduce Colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease among people at Higher risk (CHURCH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Williams O, Ting T, Matthews L, Block G, Block T, Teresi J Res Sq. 2024; .

PMID: 38659874 PMC: 11042434. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3797889/v1.


Effect of Behavioral Interventions on the Uptake of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yakoubovitch S, Zaki T, Anand S, Pecoriello J, Liang P Am J Gastroenterol. 2023; 118(10):1829-1840.

PMID: 37606070 PMC: 10592067. DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002478.


Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening on All-Cause and CRC-Specific Mortality Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zheng S, Schrijvers J, Greuter M, Kats-Ugurlu G, Lu W, de Bock G Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(7).

PMID: 37046609 PMC: 10093633. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15071948.


Application of artificial intelligence to the diagnosis and therapy of colorectal cancer.

Wang Y, He X, Nie H, Zhou J, Cao P, Ou C Am J Cancer Res. 2020; 10(11):3575-3598.

PMID: 33294256 PMC: 7716173.