Research articleEffectiveness of a Web-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Patient Decision Aid: A Randomized Controlled Trial in a Mixed-Literacy Population
Section snippets
Background
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common noncutaneous cancer in the U.S., and the second-leading cause of cancer death.1 In order to both prevent CRC and reduce its associated mortality, several national organizations recommend routine CRC screening beginning at age 50 years.2, 3 A variety of CRC screening tests are cost effective, giving patients and clinicians a choice of screening options.4
Despite the widespread recommendations for routine screening, CRC screening remains
Methods
The study was conducted at a community-based university-affiliated internal medicine faculty–resident practice serving a primarily socioeconomically disadvantaged patient population. The Wake Forest University IRB approved the study protocol, and all participants provided written informed consent.
Participants were patients aged 50–74 years who were scheduled for a routine (non-urgent care) medical visit and were overdue for CRC screening, defined as not having completed a home fecal occult
Results
Between November 2007 and September 2008, research assistants reached 401 eligible patients by telephone who agreed to participate. Of these 401 patients, 264 arrived to the clinic 45 minutes early as directed, were confirmed eligible, and were enrolled. An equal number were randomized to the CRC decision aid (CHOICE) and the control program (Figure 2). While abstracting charts for the outcomes of interest, study staff discovered that 16 randomized patients met exclusion criteria (15 were up to
Discussion
The web-based decision aid (CHOICE) increased patients' ability to state a test preference and their readiness to receive screening, regardless of literacy level. In addition, more CHOICE patients had CRC screening tests immediately ordered and completed, but these differences were modest and did not reach significance.
Prior studies have examined the use of video or web-based interventions to increase CRC screening. Patient education videos without a decision-aid component have shown mixed
Conclusion
The web-based CRC screening decision aid (CHOICE) increased test preferences and patients' readiness to receive screening, irrespective of literacy level. The decision aid's ability to effectively convey information with little staff involvement may make it a valuable resource for time-strapped clinics. Future research should focus on ways decision aids such as CHOICE can be combined with other system-level interventions to increase CRC screening.
References (33)
- et al.
Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: results of a randomized controlled trial
Prev Med
(2007) - et al.
Functional health literacy and the quality of physician–patient communication among diabetes patients
Patient Educ Couns
(2004) - et al.
Cancer statistics, 2010
CA Cancer J Clin
(2010) - et al.
Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology
CA Cancer J Clin
(2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement
Ann Intern Med
(2008)- et al.
Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Ann Intern Med
(2002) Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 50–75 years—U.S., 2008
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
(2010)- et al.
Beliefs, risk perceptions, and gaps in knowledge as barriers to colorectal cancer screening in older adults
J Am Geriatr Soc
(2008) - et al.
Predictors of colorectal cancer screening behaviors among average-risk older adults in the U.S.
Cancer Causes Control
(2008) Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review
J Natl Cancer Inst
(1997)
Literacy and health outcomes: a systematic review of the literature
J Gen Intern Med
Colorectal cancer screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs among veterans: does literacy make a difference?
J Clin Oncol
The effect of health literacy on knowledge and receipt of colorectal cancer screening: a survey study
BMC Fam Pract
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
American Academy of Family Physicians patient education materials: can patients read them?
Fam Med
Readability and cultural sensitivity of web-based patient decision aids for cancer screening and treatment: a systematic review
Med Inform Internet Med
Cited by (101)
Interventions to improve oncofertility knowledge and decision-making in patients with low health literacy: A systematic review
2024, Patient Education and CounselingThe promise of patient-directed decision support
2023, Clinical Decision Support and beyond: Progress and Opportunities in Knowledge-Enhanced Health and HealthcareHow effective are digital technology-based interventions at promoting colorectal cancer screening uptake in average-risk populations? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
2022, Preventive MedicineCitation Excerpt :The assumption was that there would be sufficient time for individuals to schedule and undergo colonoscopy if they decided to uptake screening post-intervention (Champion et al., 2018; Fernandez et al., 2015; Miller Jr. et al., 2018; Miller Jr. et al., 2011; Vernon et al., 2011). Seven of the included studies utilized interventions consisting of interactive web- or tablet-based decision-making aids (Greiner et al., 2014; Miller Jr. et al., 2018; Miller Jr. et al., 2011; Schroy 3rd et al., 2012; Gabel et al., 2020a; Gabel et al., 2020b; Clouston et al., 2014). Two of these aids additionally provided participants the ability to enrol and/or order their own screening tests at the end of the interactive decision-making process (Miller Jr. et al., 2018; Gabel et al., 2020a).
Making decisions on your own: Self-administered decision aids about colorectal cancer screening – A systematic review and meta-analyses
2022, Patient Education and CounselingCitation Excerpt :Table 3 presents the characteristics of the studies. Among the 14 included studies, eight were RCTs [13,14,28–33], two were a non-randomized trials [34,35], and four were before/after studies [36–39]. Ten studies were conducted in the USA [29–38], two in Australia [13,14], one in Denmark [28], and one in the Netherlands [39].