» Articles » PMID: 27430237

Primary Care Physicians' Support of Shared Decision Making for Different Cancer Screening Decisions

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2016 Jul 20
PMID 27430237
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Despite its widespread advocacy, shared decision making (SDM) is not routinely used for cancer screening. To better understand the implementation barriers, we describe primary care physicians' (PCPs') support for SDM across diverse cancer screening contexts.

Methods: Surveys were mailed to a random sample of USA-based PCPs. Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, we tested for associations of PCPs' support of SDM with the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) assigned recommendation grade, assessed whether the decision pertained to not screening older patients, and the PCPs' autonomous v. controlled motivation-orientation for using SDM.

Results: PCPs (n = 278) were, on average, aged 52 years, 38% female, and 69% white. Of these, 79% endorsed discussing screening benefits as very important to SDM; 64% for discussing risks; and 31% for agreeing with patient's opinion. PCPs were most likely to rate SDM as very important for colorectal cancer screening in adults aged 50-75 years (69%), and least likely for colorectal cancer screening in adults aged >85 years (34%). Regression results indicated the importance of PCPs' having autonomous or self-determined reasons for engaging in SDM (e.g., believing in the benefits of SDM) (OR = 2.29, 95% CI, 1.87 to 2.79). PCPs' support for SDM varied by USPSTF recommendation grade (overall contrast, X = 14.7; P = 0.0054), with support greatest for A-Grade recommendations. Support for SDM was lower in contexts where decisions pertained to not screening older patients (OR = 0.45, 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.56).

Limitations: It is unknown whether PCPs' perceptions of the importance of SDM behaviors differs with specific screening decisions or the potential limited ability to generalize findings.

Conclusions: Our results highlight the need to document SDM benefits and consider the specific contextual challenges, such as the level of uncertainty or whether evidence supports recommending/not recommending screening, when implementing SDM across an array of cancer screening contexts.

Citing Articles

Slipping through the cracks: Who is eligible but does not receive a healthcare provider recommendation for lung cancer screening?.

Williamson T, Walsh L, Rawl S, Carter-Bawa L Lung Cancer. 2023; 179:107185.

PMID: 37023535 PMC: 10219439. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2023.107185.


Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.

Elliott T, Asche S, OConnor P, Dehmer S, Ekstrom H, Truitt A Med Decis Making. 2022; 42(6):808-821.

PMID: 35209775 PMC: 9283203. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X221082083.


Delivering the unexpected-Information needs for PSA screening from Men's perspective: A qualitative study.

Kuss K, Adarkwah C, Becker M, Donner-Banzhoff N, Schloessler K Health Expect. 2021; 24(4):1403-1412.

PMID: 34097797 PMC: 8369103. DOI: 10.1111/hex.13275.


How Health-Care Organizations Implement Shared Decision-making When It Is Required for Reimbursement: The Case of Lung Cancer Screening.

Tabriz A, Neslund-Dudas C, Turner K, Rivera M, Reuland D, Lafata J Chest. 2020; 159(1):413-425.

PMID: 32798520 PMC: 7893305. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.07.078.


Scripts and Strategies for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening with Adults > 75 Years: a Qualitative Study.

Schonberg M, Jacobson A, Karamourtopoulos M, Aliberti G, Pinheiro A, Smith A J Gen Intern Med. 2020; 35(7):2076-2083.

PMID: 32128689 PMC: 7351918. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-05735-z.


References
1.
Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A, Willan A, Farrell S . Shared treatment decision making: what does it mean to physicians?. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(5):932-6. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.05.057. View

2.
Fiks A, Hughes C, Gafen A, Guevara J, Barg F . Contrasting parents' and pediatricians' perspectives on shared decision-making in ADHD. Pediatrics. 2010; 127(1):e188-96. PMC: 3010085. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2010-1510. View

3.
Legare F, Moumjid-Ferdjaoui N, Drolet R, Stacey D, Harter M, Bastian H . Core competencies for shared decision making training programs: insights from an international, interdisciplinary working group. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2013; 33(4):267-73. PMC: 3911960. DOI: 10.1002/chp.21197. View

4.
Braddock 3rd C, Edwards K, Hasenberg N, Laidley T, Levinson W . Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics. JAMA. 1999; 282(24):2313-20. DOI: 10.1001/jama.282.24.2313. View

5.
Levesque C, Williams G, Elliot D, Pickering M, Bodenhamer B, Finley P . Validating the theoretical structure of the Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ) across three different health behaviors. Health Educ Res. 2006; 22(5):691-702. DOI: 10.1093/her/cyl148. View