Search

Purpose: Previous studies report infrequent use of shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. It is unknown whether this pattern has changed recently considering increased emphasis on shared decision making in prostate cancer screening recommendations. Thus, the objective of this study is to examine recent changes in shared decision making.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years and older in the United States using 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data (n = 9,598). Changes in receipt of shared decision making were expressed as adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified on PSA testing (recent [in the past year] or no testing). Elements of shared decision making assessed included the patient being informed about the advantages only, advantages and disadvantages, and full shared decision making (advantages, disadvantages, and uncertainties).Results: Among men with recent PSA testing, 58.5% and 62.6% reported having received ≥1 element of shared decision making in 2010 and 2015, respectively (P = .054, aPR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.98-1.11). Between 2010 and 2015, being told only about the advantages of PSA testing significantly declined (aPR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.96) and full shared decision making prevalence significantly increased (aPR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.28-1.79) in recently tested men. Among men without prior PSA testing, 10% reported ≥1 element of shared decision making, which did not change with time.Conclusion: Between 2010 and 2015, there was no increase in shared decision making among men with recent PSA testing though there was a shift away from only being told about the advantages of PSA testing towards full shared decision making. Many men receiving PSA testing did not receive shared decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interval colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for 3% to 8% of all cases of CRC in the United States. Data on interval CRC by race/ethnicity are scant.Objective: To examine whether risk for interval CRC among Medicare patients differs by race/ethnicity and whether this potential variation is accounted for by differences in the quality of colonoscopy, as measured by physicians' polyp detection rate (PDR).Design: Population-based cohort study.Setting: Medicare program.Participants: Patients aged 66 to 75 years who received colonoscopy between 2002 and 2011 and were followed through 2013.Measurements: Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox models were used to estimate cumulative probabilities and hazard ratios (HRs) of interval CRC, defined as a CRC diagnosis 6 to 59 months after colonoscopy.Results: There were 2735 cases of interval CRC identified over 235 146 person-years of follow-up. A higher proportion of black persons (52.8%) than white persons (46.2%) received colonoscopy from physicians with a lower PDR. This rate was significantly associated with interval CRC risk. The probability of interval CRC by the end of follow-up was 7.1% in black persons and 5.8% in white persons. Compared with white persons, black persons had significantly higher risk for interval CRC (HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.13 to 1.51]); the disparity was more pronounced for cancer of the rectum (HR, 1.70 [CI, 1.25 to 2.31]) and distal colon (HR, 1.45 [CI, 1.00 to 2.11]) than for cancer of the proximal colon (HR, 1.17 [CI, 0.96 to 1.42]). Adjustment for PDR did not alter HRs by race/ethnicity, but differences between black persons and white persons were greater among physicians with higher PDRs.Limitation: Colonoscopy and polypectomy were identified by using billing codes.Conclusion: Among elderly Medicare enrollees, the risk for interval CRC was higher in black persons than in white persons; the difference was more pronounced for cancer of the distal colon and rectum and for physicians with higher PDRs.Primary Funding Source: American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A recent study estimates that 277,000 colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and 203,000 CRC deaths will be averted between 2013 and 2030 if the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of increasing CRC screening prevalence to 80% by 2018 is reached. However, the number of individuals who need to be screened (NNS) to achieve this goal is unknown. In this communication, the authors estimate the NNS to achieve 80% by 2018 nationwide and by state.Methods: The authors estimated the NNS by subtracting adults aged 50 to 75 years who would need to be screened to achieve an 80% CRC screening prevalence from the number who are currently guideline-compliant from population estimates for this age group. The 2013 National Health Interview Survey and the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used to estimate CRC screening prevalence and data from the US Census Bureau were used to estimate population projections. The NNS were age-standardized and sex-standardized.Results: Nationwide, 24.39 million individuals (95% confidence interval, 24.37-24.41 million) aged 50 to 75 years will need to be screened to achieve 80% by 2018. By state, the NNS ranged from 45,400 in Vermont to 2.72 million in California. The majority of individuals who need to be screened are aged 50 to 64 years and the largest subgroup is privately insured.Conclusions: The authors estimated that at least 24.4 million additional individuals in the United States will need to be screened to achieve the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of increasing CRC screening prevalence to 80% by 2018. To reach this goal, improving facilitators of CRC screening, including physician recommendation and patient awareness, is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]