Social disparities in the use of colonoscopy by primary care physicians in Ontario

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is unclear if all persons in Ontario have equal access to colonoscopy. This research was designed to describe long-term trends in the use of colonoscopy by primary care physicians (PCPs) in Ontario, and to determine whether PCP characteristics influence the use of colonoscopy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a population-based retrospective study of PCPs in Ontario between the years 1996-2005. Using administrative data we identified a screen-eligible group of patients aged 50-74 years in Ontario. These patients were linked to the PCP who provided the most continuous care to them during each year. We determined the use of any colonoscopy among these patients. We calculated the rate of colonoscopy for each PCP as the number of patients undergoing colonoscopies per 100 screen eligible patients. Negative binomial regression was used to identify factors associated with the rate of colonoscopy, using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering of patients within PCPs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between 7,955 and 8,419 PCPs in Ontario per year (median age 43 years) had at least 10 eligible patients in their practices. The use of colonoscopy by PCPs increased sharply in Ontario during the study period, from a median rate of 1.51 [inter quartile range (IQR) 0.57-2.62] per 100 screen eligible patients in 1996 to 4.71 (IQR 2.70-7.53) in 2005. There was substantial variation between PCPs in their use of colonoscopy. PCPs who were Canadian medical graduates and with more years of experience were more likely to use colonoscopy after adjusting for their patient characteristics. PCPs were more likely to use colonoscopy if their patient populations were predominantly women, older, had more illnesses, and if their patients resided in less marginalized neighborhoods (lower unemployment, fewer immigrants, higher income, higher education, and higher English/French fluency).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There is substantial variation in the use of colonoscopy by PCPs, and this variation has increased as the overall use of colonoscopy increased over time. PCPs whose patients were more marginalized were less likely to use colonoscopy, suggesting that there are inequities in access.</p

Ethnic differences in cancer symptom awareness and barriers to seeking medical help in England

Background: Ethnic differences in cancer symptom awareness and barriers to seeking medical help in the English population are not fully understood. We aimed to quantify these differences, to help develop more effective health campaigns, tailored to the needs of different ethnic groups. Methods: Using a large national data set (n=38492) of cross-sectional surveys that used the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure, we examined how cancer symptom awareness and barriers varied by ethnicity, controlling for socio-economic position, age and gender. Data were analysed using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Awareness of cancer symptoms was lower in minority ethnic groups than White participants, with the lowest awareness observed among Bangladeshis and Black Africans. Ethnic minorities were more likely than White British to report barriers to helpseeking. South Asians reported the highest emotional barriers, such as lack of confidence to talk to the doctor, and practical barriers, such as worry about many other things. The Irish were more likely than the White British to report practical barriers, such as being too busy to visit a doctor. White British participants were more likely than any other ethnic group to report that they would feel worried about wasting the doctor’s time. Overall, Black Africans had the lowest barriers. All differences were statistically significant (P<0.01 level), after controlling for confounders. Conclusions: Our findings suggest the need for culturally sensitive and targeted health campaigns, focused on improving recognition of cancer symptoms among ethnic minorities. Campaigns should tackle the specific barriers prevalent in each ethnic group

Colorectal cancer risk assessment and screening recommendation: a community survey of healthcare providers' practice from a patient perspective

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Family history is a common risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC), yet it is often underused to guide risk assessment and the provision of risk-appropriate CRC screening recommendation. The aim of this study was to identify from a patient perspective health care providers' current practice relating to: (i) assessment of family history of CRC; (ii) notification of "increased risk" to patients at "moderately/potentially high" familial risk; and (iii) recommendation that patients undertake CRC screening.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>1592 persons aged 56-88 years randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS), New South Wales, Australia were mailed a questionnaire. 1117 participants (70%) returned a questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty eight percent of respondents reported ever being asked about their family history of CRC. Ever discussing family history of CRC with a health care provider was significantly more likely to occur for persons with a higher level of education, who had ever received screening advice and with a lower physical component summary score. Fifty one percent of persons at "moderately/potentially high risk" were notified of their "increased risk" of developing CRC. Thirty one percent of persons across each level of risk had ever received CRC screening advice from a health care provider. Screening advice provision was significantly more likely to occur for persons who had ever discussed their family history of CRC with a health care provider and who were at "moderately/potentially high risk".</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Effective interventions that integrate both the assessment and notification of familial risk of CRC to the wider population are needed. Systematic and cost-effective mechanisms that facilitate family history collection, risk assessment and provision of screening advice within the primary health care setting are required.</p