Dataset Information

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fidelity in primary care. Given limited patient visit time and competing demands, primary care providers (PCPs) tend to prioritize a small subset of these recommendations. Completion rates of some of these services, including CRC screening, are suboptimal. Expanding delivery of preventive services to other healthcare providers, where possible, can improve access and uptake, particularly in medically underserved areas or populations. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (at-home, stool-based testing) for CRC screening can be distributed and resulted without PCP involvement. Pharmacists have long delivered preventive services (e.g., influenza vaccination) and may be a good option for expanding CRC screening delivery using FIT, but it is not clear how PCPs would perceive this expansion.

Methods

We used semi-structured interviews with PCPs in North Carolina and Washington state to assess perceptions and recommendations for a potential pharmacy-based FIT distribution program (PharmFIT™). Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to elucidate potential multi-level facilitators of and barriers to implementation of PharmFIT™.

Results

We completed 30 interviews with PCPs in North Carolina (N = 12) and Washington state (N = 18). PCPs in both states were largely accepting of PharmFIT™, with several important considerations. First, PCPs felt that pharmacists should receive appropriate training for identifying patients eligible and due for FIT screening. Second, a clear understanding of responsibility for tracking tests, communication, and, particularly, follow-up of positive test results should be established and followed. Finally, clear electronic workflows should be established for relay of test result information between the pharmacy and the primary care clinic.

Conclusion

If the conditions are met regarding pharmacist training, follow-up for positive FITs, and transfer of documentation, PCPs are likely to support PharmFIT™ as a way for their patients to obtain and complete CRC screening using FIT.

SUBMITTER: Brenner AT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10463525 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study.

Brenner Alison T AT Rohweder Catherine L CL Wangen Mary M Atkins Dana L DL Ceballos Rachel M RM Correa Sara S Ferrari Renée M RM Issaka Rachel B RB Ittes Annika A Odebunmi Olufeyisayo O OO Reuland Daniel S DS Waters Austin R AR Wheeler Stephanie B SB Shah Parth D PD

BMC health services research 20230823 1

<h4>Background</h4>The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fidelity in primary care. Given limited patient visit time and competing demands, primary care providers (PCPs) tend to prioritize a small subset of these recommendations. Completion rates of some of ...[more]

PMID: 37612656

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPrimary care is an essential component of any health system, but building high-quality primary care has proven to be a challenge for most developing countries. Among the multiplicity of providers in South Asia, one of the most ubiquitous channels through which not only medicines are obtained but also primary care advice is sought is the neighborhood pharmacy. There are widespread availability of pharmacies in South Asia. There is also good evidence that working with pharmacies in this way is a globally accepted idea, and there are several examples of countries, such as France and Nigeria, that have integrated pharmacies into their primary care systems and entrusted them with significant responsibilities.MethodsIn this paper, we explore the potential of this channel as a formal primary care provider, with a particular focus on the South Asian context, by examining how pharmacies perform against the seven Starfield attributes of (i) first contact care, (ii) continuity of care, (iii) comprehensiveness, (iv) coordination, (v) family centredness, (vi) cultural competency, and (vii) community orientation. In the paper, we use data on pharmacies from four pharmacy-related interventions, one from Bangladesh and three from India, to carry out our analysis using the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) framework.ResultsWe find that even in the South Asian context, pharmacies provide several components of good primary care. As expected, they demonstrate a strong orientation toward the community in which they are located and are able to provide first-contact care. However, we find no direct evidence that they are able to offer continuity of care or bring to bear family-centredness and cultural competency when dealing with their patients. It is encouraging, however, that while there is no formal evidence of this in any of the interventions, multiple anecdotal examples suggest that pharmacists do indeed do much of this, but perhaps in an informal and inconsistent manner.DiscussionThe evidence from these studies provides support for the view that pharmacies have many of the inherent characteristics needed to become an effective primary care channel and already play an important role in providing access to health information and care. However, it is also clear from the research that without additional training and access to tools, pharmacies will not have the competency or knowledge necessary to provide these services or even act as an effective gateway to other healthcare providers. To fully unlock this opportunity, therefore, any organization that wishes to engage with them will need to have the vision and patience to work with this network for an extended period of time and not merely aspire for incremental improvements but have a strategy in place that fundamentally changes the capabilities and the roles that pharmacies can play.

Project description:BackgroundU.S. professional organizations have provided conflicting recommendations on annual vs. biennial mammography screening. Potential harms of more frequent screening include increased anxiety and costs of false positive results, including unnecessary breast biopsies and overdiagnosis.ObjectiveTo characterize current practices and beliefs surrounding mammography screening frequency and perspectives on using risk-based screening to inform screening intervals.DesignSemi-structured interviews informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ParticipantsPatients, primary care providers (PCPs), third-party stakeholders (breast radiologists, radiology administrators, patient advocates).Main measuresQualitative data, with a codebook developed based upon prespecified implementation science constructs.Key resultsWe interviewed 25 patients, 11 PCPs, and eight key stakeholders, including three radiologists, two radiology administrators, and three patient advocates. Most patients reported having annual mammograms, however, half believed having mammograms every two years was acceptable. Some women were worried early breast cancer would be missed if undergoing biennial screening. PCPs were equally split between recommending annual and biennial mammograms. Although PCPs were interested in using breast cancer risk models to inform screening decisions, concerns raised include time burden and lack of familiarity with breast cancer risk assessment tools. All breast radiologists believed patients should receive annual mammograms, while patient advocates and radiology administrators were split between annual vs. biennial. Radiologists were worried about missing breast cancer diagnoses when mammograms are not performed yearly. Patient advocates and radiology administrators were more open to biennial mammograms and utilizing risk-based screening.ConclusionsUncertainty remains across stakeholder groups regarding appropriate mammogram screening intervals. Radiologists recommend annual mammography, whereas patients and PCPs were evenly split between annual vs. biennial screening, although both favored annual screening among higher-risk women. Breast cancer risk assessment tools may help facilitate decisions about screening intervals, but face barriers to widespread implementation in the primary care setting. These results will inform future implementation strategies to adopt risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Project description:BackgroundCare coordination has been a common tool for practices seeking to manage complex patients, yet there remains confusion about the most effective and sustainable model. Research exists on opinions of providers of care coordination but there is limited information on perspectives of those in the insurance industry about key elements. We sought to gather opinions from primary care providers and administrators in Minnesota who were involved in a CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) transformational grant implementing COMPASS (Care Of Mental, Physical And Substance-use Syndromes), an evidence-based model of care coordination for depressed patients comorbid with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease. We then sought to compare these views with those of private insurance representatives in Minnesota.MethodsWe used qualitative methods to conducted forty-two key informant interviews with primary care providers (n = 15); administrators (n = 15); and insurers (n = 12). We analyzed the recorded and transcribed data, once de-identified, using a frameworks analysis approach.ResultsWe identified six primary themes: 1) a defined scope, rationale, and key partnerships for building comprehensive care coordination programs, 2) effective information exchange, 3) a trained and available workforce, 4) the need for a business model and a financially justifiable program, 5) a need for evaluation and ongoing improvement of care coordination, and 6) the importance of patient and family engagement. Overall consensus across stakeholder groups was high including a call for payment reform to support a valued service. Despite their role in paying for care, insurance representatives did not stress reduced utilization as more important than other outcomes.ConclusionsPrimary care providers and administrators from different organizations and backgrounds, all with experience in COMPASS, in large part agreed with insurance representatives on the main elements of a sustainable model and the need for health reform to sustain this service.

Project description:RationaleLung cancer screening has a mortality benefit to high-risk smokers, but implementation remains suboptimal. Providers represent the key entry point to screening, and an understanding of provider perspectives on lung cancer screening is necessary to improve referral and overall implementation.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to understand knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, barriers, and facilitators to screening in a diverse group of referring pulmonologists and primary care providers.MethodsWe conducted an electronic survey of primary care and pulmonary providers within a tertiary care medical center across different practice sites. The survey covered the following domains: 1) beliefs and assessment of evidence, 2) knowledge of lung cancer screening and guidelines, 3) current screening practices, 4) barriers and facilitators, and 5) demographic and practice characteristics.ResultsThe 196 participants included 80% primary care clinicians and 19% pulmonologists (1% others). Forty-one percent practiced at university-based or affiliated clinics, 47% at county hospital-based clinics, and 12% at other or unidentified sites. The majority endorsed lung cancer screening effectiveness (74%); however, performance on knowledge-based assessments of screening eligibility, documentation, and nodule management was suboptimal. Key barriers included inadequate time (36%), inadequate staffing (36%), and patients having too many other illnesses to address screening (38%). Decision aids, which are used at the point of referral, were commonly identified both as important lung cancer screening clinical facilitators (51%) and as provider knowledge facilitators (59%). There were several differences by provider specialty, including primary care providers more frequently reporting time constraints and their patients having too many other illnesses to address screening as significant barriers to lung cancer screening.ConclusionsProviders endorsed the benefits of lung cancer screening, but there are limitations in provider knowledge of key screening components. The most frequently reported barriers to screening represent a lack of clinical time or resources to address lung cancer screening in clinical practice. Facilitators for nodule management as well as point-of-care referral materials may be helpful in reducing knowledge gaps and the clinical burden of referral. These are all modifiable factors, which could be addressed to increase screening referral. Differences in attitudes and barriers by specialty should also be considered to optimize screening implementation.

Project description:BackgroundThis qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion.MethodsParticipants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation.ResultsWe conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care.ConclusionClinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined.Trial registrationRegistry: Clinicaltrials.gov.Trial registration numberNCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April 12, 2019.

Project description:BackgroundMany patients with axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) experience lengthy diagnostic delays upwards of 14 years. (5-14 years). Screening tools for axSpA have been proposed for use in primary care settings, but whether this approach could be implemented into busy primary care settings remains unknown.ObjectiveTo solicit feedback from primary care physicians regarding questions from the Inflammatory Back Pain Assessment: the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) Expert Criteria and gain insight about barriers and facilitators for implementing axSpA screening in primary care.MethodsGuided by Consolidated Criteria for reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ-criteria), we recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in-depth interviews with eight family medicine physicians and ten internists (purposeful sampling) using immersion/crystallization techniques.ResultsFew physicians reported awareness of existing classification criteria for axSpA, and many reported a lack of confidence in their ability to distinguish between inflammatory and mechanical back pain. From three domains, 10 subthemes emerged: 1) typical work-up of axSpA patients in primary care, with subthemes including the clues involved in work-up and role of clinical examinations for axSpA; 2) feedback on questions from the Inflammatory Back Pain Assessment: ASAS Expert Criteria, with subthemes to evaluate contents/questions of a potential screening tool for axSpA; and 3) implementation of the screening tool in primary care settings, with subthemes of perceived barriers including awareness, time, other conditions to screen, rare disease, and lack of structured questionnaire for back pain and perceived facilitators including workflow issues and awareness.ConclusionsPrimary care physicians believed that an improved screening instrument and a strong evidence-base to support the need for screening for axSpA are required. The implementation of axSpA screening into a busy primary care practice requires integration into the practice workflow, with use of technology suggested as a possible way to improve efficiency.

Project description:BackgroundPostnatal care (PNC) is an important set of services offered to the mother and her newborn baby immediately after birth for the first six weeks to prevent maternal and neonatal complications and death. This qualitative study explored user and provider perspectives on quality of PNC services in the selected health facilities within the context of the Maternity Homes Access in Zambia project in the Saving Mothers Giving Life districts in rural Zambia.MethodsBetween October 2018 and February 2019, forty focus group discussions (FGDs) (n = 160 participants) and twelve in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted in four districts in Southern and Eastern provinces. FGDs comprised women who delivered within the last year, fathers, community elders, and volunteers. IDIs comprised health workers at facility, district, and provincial levels. Data were analysed using content analysis guided by the international quality of care domains derived from the World Health Organization quality of care framework. Findings were triangulated to understand perceptions.ResultsOverall, study participants perceived PNC services to be beneficial. Nevertheless, respondents had mixed feelings on the quality of PNC services and expressed a stark difference in their perception of factors affecting service quality. Service users described challenges arising from ineffective communication about the new PNC guidelines, and non-adherence of service providers to quality standards regarding respect, preservation of dignity and emotional support. Other factors were long waiting hours, small examination rooms providing inadequate privacy, and low levels of confidentiality. In contrast, service providers attributed poor service quality to various health system-related factors including low staffing levels, dysfunctional referral services, low supply of essential medicines, supplies, vaccines and equipment for optimal routine emergency obstetric and newborn care and management of complications.ConclusionThese findings highlight important intervention opportunities to improve quality of PNC services in Zambia through better communication and raising awareness on PNC guidelines, respect, preservation of dignity and emotional support to mothers. Interventions should also focus on addressing contextual health system challenges including staffing levels, supply chain for essential medicines and commodities, shortening waiting time, and ensuring functional referral system.

Dataset Information

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets