0
Perspectives |

Consequences of Not Respecting Patient Preferences for Cancer Screening:  Opportunity Lost FREE

Grace A. Lin, MD, MAS; Laurel Trujillo, MD; Dominick L. Frosch, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of General Internal Medicine and Phillip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Lin); Palo Alto Medical Foundation (Dr Trujillo) and Research Institute (Dr Frosch), Palo Alto, California; and Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, University of California, Los Angeles (Dr Frosch).


Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):393-394. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.58.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

A 60-year-old woman presented to her physician for an annual physical examination. As part of the examination, she and her physician discussed colorectal cancer screening, which her physician had discussed with her at her last yearly physical. The decision at that time had been for colonoscopy, and the patient was referred to the gastroenterologist. Since the patient never followed through with the colonoscopy, the topic was broached again. As part of a quality improvement initiative designed to promote shared decision-making, the patient was given a decision support intervention (DESI) to review the options (fecal occult blood testing [FOBT], flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy, described in a booklet and DVD) and was told to let her physician know about her decision.

The patient reviewed the DESI, decided that she wanted to pursue FOBT, and informed her physician about her choice. The physician responded that FOBT was not appropriate, and that the patient should consider only flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. The patient was confused and upset that the very physician who had provided her the decision support material was not honoring her informed choice. To date, she has not followed through with colon cancer screening.

Routine screening for colorectal cancer is recommended in patients older than 50 years, and therefore discussion of colorectal cancer screening was an important and appropriate part of the primary care preventive care visit for this patient. Major clinical practice guidelines list several acceptable options for colorectal cancer screening, including the options discussed in the DESI.13 Guidelines also recommend incorporation of patient preferences into care, practicing shared decision-making, and focusing on strategies that maximize the number of individuals who get screening.2

However, studies suggest that shared decision-making is not routinely occurring in primary care, especially for colorectal cancer screening.4 In addition, over half of adults preferred FOBT to colonoscopy when given time to consider detailed information about colorectal cancer screening tests.5 Despite the data indicating patient preferences for less invasive testing, colonoscopy rates are increasing, and evidence suggests that the test may be overused, particularly in the Medicare population.67 Decision support interventions, like the one given to this patient, are a way to facilitate shared decision-making and have been associated with greater knowledge, more accurate risk perceptions, and increased participation in the decision-making process.8 However, decision support is most effective as part of a shared decision-making process, in which physician and patient discussion leads to a mutual decision that is both evidence based and incorporates the patient's preferences.

The physician had good intentions in terms of recommending that the patient be screened for colorectal cancer and helping the patient make an informed choice by providing high-quality information and decision support. The patient also did her part to become an active and informed participant in the decision-making process. However, although the evidence base supported use of FOBT as a screening modality and the patient stated her preference for the less invasive test, the physician's preference for a more invasive and technologically advanced procedure precluded a full shared decision-making conversation, ultimately resulting in a missed opportunity to screen the patient for colorectal cancer.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Correspondence: Dr Lin, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California St, Ste 265, San Francisco, CA 94118 (glin@medicine.ucsf.edu).

Financial Disclosure: Dr Lin received grants and travel allowances from the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making, and Dr Frosch served as a consultant and paid speaker for the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making.

Funding/Support: This work was supported by grant from the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making.

Additional Contributions: We thank Suepattra May, PhD, and Caroline Tietbohl, BA, for their contributions to this manuscript.

Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM.American College of Gastroenterology.  American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [published correction appears in Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(6):1613].  Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(3):739-750
PubMed   |  Link to Article
US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.  Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(9):627-637
PubMed
Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B,  et al; American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Advisory Group; US Multi-Society Task Force; American College of Radiology Colon Cancer Committee.  Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology.  Gastroenterology. 2008;134(5):1570-1595
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ling BS, Trauth JM, Fine MJ,  et al.  Informed decision-making and colorectal cancer screening: is it occurring in primary care?  Med Care. 2008;46(9):(suppl 1)  S23-S29
PubMed   |  Link to Article
DeBourcy AC, Lichtenberger S, Felton S, Butterfield KT, Ahnen DJ, Denberg TD. Community-based preferences for stool cards versus colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening.  J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(2):169-174
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Phillips KA, Liang SY, Ladabaum U,  et al.  Trends in colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.  Med Care. 2007;45(2):160-167
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Goodwin JS, Singh A, Reddy N, Riall TS, Kuo YF. Overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Medicare population.  Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(15):1335-1343
PubMed   |  Link to Article
O’Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D,  et al.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(3):CD001431
PubMed

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

References

Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM.American College of Gastroenterology.  American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [published correction appears in Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(6):1613].  Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(3):739-750
PubMed   |  Link to Article
US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.  Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(9):627-637
PubMed
Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B,  et al; American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Advisory Group; US Multi-Society Task Force; American College of Radiology Colon Cancer Committee.  Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology.  Gastroenterology. 2008;134(5):1570-1595
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ling BS, Trauth JM, Fine MJ,  et al.  Informed decision-making and colorectal cancer screening: is it occurring in primary care?  Med Care. 2008;46(9):(suppl 1)  S23-S29
PubMed   |  Link to Article
DeBourcy AC, Lichtenberger S, Felton S, Butterfield KT, Ahnen DJ, Denberg TD. Community-based preferences for stool cards versus colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening.  J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(2):169-174
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Phillips KA, Liang SY, Ladabaum U,  et al.  Trends in colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.  Med Care. 2007;45(2):160-167
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Goodwin JS, Singh A, Reddy N, Riall TS, Kuo YF. Overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Medicare population.  Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(15):1335-1343
PubMed   |  Link to Article
O’Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D,  et al.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(3):CD001431
PubMed

Correspondence

CME
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s “Cited By” API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Topics
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com