Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What Is Most Important to Patients when Deciding about Colorectal Screening?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can be administered through tests with varied characteristics and is a preference-sensitive decision.

OBJECTIVE

To assess patient experiences with a Maximum Differences Scaling (MDS) tool for eliciting values about CRC screening test characteristics and determine whether patients vary in how they prioritize test characteristics and whether this variation relates to test preferences.

DESIGN

MDS survey to elicit patients’ values for characteristics related to fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, CT colonography and colon capsule endoscopy.

PARTICIPANTS

92 patients enrolled in primary care clinics at a VA hospital and associated university.

RESULTS

Patients reported that the tool was easy to use (95%). On completion 62% would choose colonoscopy, 23% colon capsule endoscopy and 10% CT colonography. Of the attributes evaluated, patients valued sensitivity, risk of tear and need for a second test most. Sensitivity was more important to those choosing colonoscopy than those choosing other tests (median importance = 21.5 versus 19.6, p < 0.01). Concern with complications and sedation was positively associated with age (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), whereas concern with colon preparation and missing work was negatively associated with age (p < 0.009 and p < 0.03). Patients with fair or poor health status were less concerned with sensitivity than patients in good to excellent health (median importance = 19.3 versus 21.4, p < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study suggests that patients vary in how they prioritize colorectal cancer screening test attributes; this variation is associated with test preferences, and this MDS tool is feasible to use and may help patients construct their preferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allicock M, Sandelowski M, DeVellis B, Campbell M. Variations in meanings of the personal core value "Health". Patient Educ Counsel. 2008;73:347–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Reyna V. A theory of medical decision making and health: fuzzy trace theory. Med Decis Making. 2008;28:850–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mandel J, Bond J, Church T, for the Minnesota colon cancer control study, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen O, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. 1996;348:1467–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hardcastle J, Chamberlain J, Robinson M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996;348:1472–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Winawer S, Zauber A, Ho M, The National Polyp Study Group, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Newcomb P, Norfleet R, Storer B, Surawicz T, Marcus P. Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992;84:1572–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Muller A, Sonnenberg A. Protection by endoscopy against death from colorectal cancer. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:1741–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Selby J, Friedman G, Quesenberry C, Weiss N. A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:653–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. SEER Stat Fact Sheet; colon and rectum. National Cancer Institute. Available at: http://seercancergov/statfacts/html/colorecthtml Accessed June 3, 2009.

  12. Jemal A, Siegal R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eliakim R, Fireman Z, Gralnek I, et al. Evaluation of the PillCam™ Colon capsule in the detection of colonic pathology: results of the first multicenter, prospective, comparative study. Endoscopy. 2006;38:963–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schoofs N, Deviere J, Van Gossun A. PillCam™ colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy for colorectal tumor diagnosis: a prospective pilot study. Endoscopy. 2006;38:971–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pignone M, Bucholtz D, Harris R. Patient preferences for colon cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:432–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pignone M. Patient preferences for colon cancer screening: the role of out-of-pocket costs. Am J Managed Care. 2007;13:390–92.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schroy P, Lal S, Glick J, Robinson P, Zamor P, Heerem T. Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening: how does stool DNA testing fare? Am J Managed Care. 2007;13:393–400.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pignone M, Harris R, Kinsinger L. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:761–69.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dolan N, Frisina S. Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision aid for colorectal cancer screening. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:125–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Griffith J, Lewis C, Brenner A, Pignone M. The effect of offering different numbers of colorectal cancer screening test options in a decision aid: a pilot randomized trial. BMC Med Inform and Decis Making. 2008;8:4–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Griffith J, Fichter M, Fowler F, Lewis C, Pignone M. Should a colon cancer screening decision aid include the option of no testing? A comparative trial of two decision aids. BMC Med Inform and Decis Making. 2008;8:10–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim J, Whitney A, Hayter S, et al. Development and initial testing of a computer-based patient decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening for primary care practice. BMC Med Inform and Decis Making. 2005;5:36–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ruffin M, Fetters P, Jimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Prevent Med. 2007;45:267–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Van Dam L, Hol L, Bekker-Grob E, et al. What determines individuals’ preferences for colorectal cancer screening programmes? A discrete choice experiment. Eur J Cancer 2009;(2009). doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2009.07.014.

  25. Hawley S, Volk R, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon S, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46:S10–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Marshall D, Johnson F, Phillips K, Marshall J, Thabane L, Kulin N. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health. 2007;10:415–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dolan J. Patient priorities in colorectal cancer screening decisions. Health Expect. 2005;8:334–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. U.S Preventative Services Task Force USPST. Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–37.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Louviere, J. The best-worst or maximum difference measurement model: Applications to behavioral research in marketing. The American Marketing Association's Behavioral Research Conference Phoenix, Arizona 1993.

  30. Flynn T, Louviere J, Peters T, Coast J. Estimating preferences for a dermatology consultation using Best-Worst Scaling: comparison of various methods of analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:76–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Understanding HB: An intuitive approach. Richard M. Johnson, Sawtooth Software. 2000. Available at: http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/undhb.pdf Accessed October 5, 2009.

  32. MaxDiff analysis: simple counting, individual-level logit, and HB. Bryan Orme. Sawtooth Software, Inc. Available at: http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/inivmaxdiff.pdf Accessed October 5, 2009.

  33. Fraenkel, L., Chodkowski, D., Lim, J., Garcia-Tsao, G. Patients’ preferences for treatment of hepatitis C. Med Decis Making 2009. doi:10.1177/0272989X09341588.

  34. Fraenkel L, Bogardus S, Concato J, Felson D, Wittink D. Patient preferences for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:1372–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Longacre A, Imaeda A, Garcia-Tsao G, Fraenkel L. A pilot project examining the predicted preferences of patients and physicians in the primary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage. Hepatology. 2008;47:169–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. DeBourcy A, Lichtenberger S, Felton S, Butterfield K, Ahnen D, Denberg T. Community-based preferences for stool cards versus colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;23:169–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Almog R, Ezra G, Lavi I, Rennert G, Hagoel L. The public prefers fecal occult blood test over colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Cancer Prevent. 2008;17:430–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ling B, Moskowitz M, Wachs D, Pearson B, Schroy P. Attitudes toward colorectal cancer screening tests. A survey of patients and physicians. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:822–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Leard L, Savides T, Ganiats T. Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening. J Fam Pract. 1997;45:211–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nelson R, Schwartz A. A survey of individual preference for colorectal cancer screening technique. BMC Cancer. 2004;4:76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Wolf R, Basch C, Brouse C, Shmuckler C, Shea S. Patient preferences and adherence to colorectal cancer screening in an urban population. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:809–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Powell A, Burgess A, Vernon S, et al. Colorectal cancer screening mode preferences among US veterans. Prevent Med. 2009;49:442–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. McGregor E, Hilsden R, Li F, Bryant H, Murray A. Low uptake of colorectal cancer screening 3 years after release of national recommendations for screening. Am J Gastro. 2007;102:1727–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Meissner H, Breen N, Klabunde C, Vernon S. Patterns of colorectal cancer screening uptake among men and woman in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:389–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. Fraenkel is supported by the K23 Award AR048826-01 A1

Conflict of Interest

None disclosed.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Epidemiology Research Center, VA CT Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA

    Avlin Imaeda MD, PhD, Danielle Bender MD & Liana Fraenkel MD, MPH

  2. LMP 1080, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, 310 Cedar St., New Haven, CT, 06510, USA

    Avlin Imaeda MD, PhD, Danielle Bender MD & Liana Fraenkel MD, MPH

Authors
  1. Avlin Imaeda MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Danielle Bender MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Liana Fraenkel MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Avlin Imaeda MD, PhD.

Additional information

Presented in abstract form at Digestive Diseases Weekly June 2009, Chicago, IL.

Electronic Supplementary Materials

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material

(PDF 82 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Imaeda, A., Bender, D. & Fraenkel, L. What Is Most Important to Patients when Deciding about Colorectal Screening?. J GEN INTERN MED 25, 688–693 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1318-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1318-9

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation