Abstract:Importance: Decisions about whether to stop colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests in older adults can be difficult and may benefit from shared decision-making (SDM). Objective: To evaluate the effect of physician training in SDM and electronic previsit reminders (intervention) vs reminders only (comparator) on receipt of the patient-preferred approach to CRC screening and on overall CRC screening rates of older adults at 12 months. Design, setting, and participants: This was a secondary analysis of the Promoting Informed Decisions About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Older Adults (PRIMED) cluster randomized clinical trial. In the PRIMED trial, primary care physicians (PCPs) from 36 primary care practices in Massachusetts and Maine were enrolled between May 1 and August 30, 2019, and were randomized to the intervention group or the comparator group. Patients aged 76 to 85 years who were overdue for CRC screening and did not have a prior diagnosis of CRC enrolled between October 21, 2019, and April 8, 2021. Data analysis was performed between May 24, 2022, and May 10, 2023. Interventions: Primary care physicians in the intervention group completed an SDM training course and received previsit reminders of patients eligible for CRC testing discussion, whereas PCPs in the comparator group received reminders only. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was concordance, or the percentage of patients who received their preferred screening approach. Postvisit surveys were administered to assess patient preference for testing, and electronic health record review was used to assess CRC testing at 12 months. Heterogeneity of treatment effect analyses examined interaction between study groups and different factors on concordance rates. Results: This study included 59 physicians and 466 older adults. Physicians had a mean (SD) age of 52.7 (9.4) years and a mean (SD) of 21.6 (10.2) years in practice; 30 (50.8%) were women and 16 (27.1%) reported prior training in SDM. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 80.3 (2.8) years; 249 (53.4%) were women and 238 (51.1%) reported excellent or very good overall health. Patients preferred stool-based tests (161 [34.5%]), followed by colonoscopy (116 [24.8%]) or no further screening (97 [20.8%]); 75 (16.1%) were not sure. The distribution of patient preferences was similar across groups (P = .36). At 12 months, test uptake was also similar for both the intervention group (29 [12.3%] for colonoscopy, 62 [26.3%] for stool-based tests, and 145 [61.4%] for no testing) and the comparator group (32 [13.9%] for colonoscopy, 35 [15.2%] for stool-based tests, and 163 [70.9%] for no testing; P = .08). Approximately half of patients in the intervention group received their preferred approach vs the comparator group (115 of 226 [50.9%] vs 103 of 223 [46.2%]; P = .47). Heterogeneity of treatment effect analyses found significantly higher rates with the intervention vs the comparator for patients with a strong intention to follow through with the preferred approach (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.79 [95% CI, 1.11-2.89]; P = .02, P = .05 for interaction) and for patients who reported more than 5 minutes (AOR, 3.27 [95% CI, 1.25-8.59]; P = .02, P = .05 for interaction) of discussion with their PCP regarding screening. Higher rates were also observed among patients who reported 2 to 5 minutes of discussion with their PCP, although this finding was not significant (AOR, 1.89 [95% CI, 0.93-3.84]; P = .08, P = .05 for interaction). Conclusions and relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, approximately half of older patients received their preferred approach to CRC screening. Physician training in SDM did not result in higher concordance rates overall but may have benefitted some subgroups. Future work to refine and evaluate clinical decision support (in the form of an electronic advisory or reminder) as well as focused SDM skills training for PCPs may promote high-quality, preference-concordant decisions about CRC testing for older adults. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959696.

Influence of the Way Results Are Presented on Research Interpretation and Medical Decision Making: the PRIMER Collaboration Randomized Studies

Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions

From Pre-test and Post-test Probabilities to Medical Decision Making

Towards Treatment Effect Interpretability: A Bayesian Re-analysis of 194,129 Patient Outcomes Across 230 Oncology Trials

Promoting Informed Decisions About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Older Adults (PRIMED Study): a Physician Cluster Randomized Trial

Effect of a Peer Comparison and Educational Intervention on Medical Test Conversation Quality: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Improving the process of informed consent for percutaneous coronary intervention: patient outcomes from the Patient Risk Information Services Manager (ePRISM) study

Effect of Intensivist Communication in a Simulated Setting on Interpretation of Prognosis Among Family Members of Patients at High Risk of Intensive Care Unit Admission: A Randomized Trial

Using Separate Single-Outcome Risk Presentations Instead of Integrated Multioutcome Formats Improves Comprehension in Discrete Choice Experiments

A powerful partnership: researchers and patients working together to develop a patient-facing summary of clinical trial outcome data

What Affects Perceived Trustworthiness of Online Medical Information and Subsequent Treatment Decision Making? Randomized Trials on the Role of Uncertainty and Institutional Cues

Clinician's Approach to Advanced Statistical Methods: Win Ratios, Restricted Mean Survival Time, Responder Analyses, and Standardized Mean Differences

Shared Decision-Making in Colorectal Cancer Screening for Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Adapting power calculations to include a superiority margin: what are the implications?

Influence of Cardiovascular Risk Communication Tools and Presentation Formats on Patient Perceptions and Preferences

Patient Characteristics and the Extent to Which Clinicians Involve Patients in Decision Making: Secondary Analyses of Pooled Data

Physician Perspectives on the Nonclinical Factors That Contribute to Decision-Making for Advanced Prostate Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study

Patients' and Physicians' Beliefs and Attitudes towards Integrating Personalized Risk Estimates into Patient Education about Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy

An evaluation of confidence intervals for a cumulative proportion to enable decisions at interim reviews of single-arm trials

Patient Perceptions of Standardized Risk Language Used in American College of Radiology Prostate MRI PIRADS Scores