Soohyun Hwang, Allison J Lazard, Meredith K Reffner Collins, Alison T Brenner, Hillary M Heiling, Allison M Deal, Seth D Crockett, Daniel S Reuland, Jennifer Elston Lafata
{"title":"Exploring the Acceptability of Text Messages to Inform and Support Shared Decision-making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Online Panel Survey.","authors":"Soohyun Hwang, Allison J Lazard, Meredith K Reffner Collins, Alison T Brenner, Hillary M Heiling, Allison M Deal, Seth D Crockett, Daniel S Reuland, Jennifer Elston Lafata","doi":"10.2196/40917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While online portals may be helpful to engage patients in shared decision-making at the time of cancer screening, because of known disparities in patient portal use, sole reliance on portals to support cancer screening decision-making could exacerbate well-known disparities in this health care area. Innovative approaches are needed to engage patients in health care decision-making and to support equitable shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We assessed the acceptability of text messages to engage sociodemographically diverse individuals in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions and support shared decision-making in practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a brief text message program offering educational information consisting of components of shared decision-making regarding CRC screening (eg, for whom screening is recommended, screening test options, and pros/cons of options). The program and postprogram survey were offered to members of an online panel. The outcome of interest was program acceptability measured by observed program engagement, participant-reported acceptability, and willingness to use similar programs (behavioral intent). We evaluated acceptability among historically marginalized categories of people defined by income, literacy, and race.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 289 participants, 115 reported having a low income, 146 were Black/African American, and 102 had less than extreme confidence in their health literacy. With one exception, we found equal or greater acceptability, regardless of measure, within each of the marginalized categories of people compared to their counterparts. The exception was that participants reporting an income below US $50,000 were less likely to engage with sufficient content of the program to learn that there was a choice among different CRC screening tests (difference -10.4%, 95% CI -20.1 to -0.8). Of note, Black/African American participants reported being more likely to sign up to receive text messages from their doctor's office compared to white participants (difference 18.7%, 95% CI 7.0-30.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Study findings demonstrate general acceptance of text messages to inform and support CRC screening shared decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":45538,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10199389/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/40917","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: While online portals may be helpful to engage patients in shared decision-making at the time of cancer screening, because of known disparities in patient portal use, sole reliance on portals to support cancer screening decision-making could exacerbate well-known disparities in this health care area. Innovative approaches are needed to engage patients in health care decision-making and to support equitable shared decision-making.
Objective: We assessed the acceptability of text messages to engage sociodemographically diverse individuals in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions and support shared decision-making in practice.
Methods: We developed a brief text message program offering educational information consisting of components of shared decision-making regarding CRC screening (eg, for whom screening is recommended, screening test options, and pros/cons of options). The program and postprogram survey were offered to members of an online panel. The outcome of interest was program acceptability measured by observed program engagement, participant-reported acceptability, and willingness to use similar programs (behavioral intent). We evaluated acceptability among historically marginalized categories of people defined by income, literacy, and race.
Results: Of the 289 participants, 115 reported having a low income, 146 were Black/African American, and 102 had less than extreme confidence in their health literacy. With one exception, we found equal or greater acceptability, regardless of measure, within each of the marginalized categories of people compared to their counterparts. The exception was that participants reporting an income below US $50,000 were less likely to engage with sufficient content of the program to learn that there was a choice among different CRC screening tests (difference -10.4%, 95% CI -20.1 to -0.8). Of note, Black/African American participants reported being more likely to sign up to receive text messages from their doctor's office compared to white participants (difference 18.7%, 95% CI 7.0-30.3).
Conclusions: Study findings demonstrate general acceptance of text messages to inform and support CRC screening shared decision-making.
背景:虽然在线门户网站可能有助于患者在癌症筛查时参与共同决策,但由于已知患者门户网站使用的差异,仅依赖门户网站来支持癌症筛查决策可能会加剧这一卫生保健领域众所周知的差异。需要采取创新办法,使患者参与保健决策并支持公平的共同决策。目的:我们评估短信在结肠直肠癌(CRC)筛查决策中的可接受性,并在实践中支持共同决策。方法:我们开发了一个简短的短信程序,提供有关CRC筛查的共同决策组成部分的教育信息(例如,建议对谁进行筛查,筛查测试选项和选项的利弊)。课程和课程后的调查是提供给在线小组成员的。兴趣的结果是通过观察到的项目参与、参与者报告的可接受性和使用类似项目的意愿(行为意图)来衡量项目的可接受性。我们评估了历史上被收入、文化和种族界定的边缘化人群的可接受性。结果:在289名参与者中,115人报告收入较低,146人是黑人/非裔美国人,102人对自己的健康素养信心不足。除了一个例外,我们发现,在每一个被边缘化的人群中,无论以何种方式,与他们的同行相比,他们的可接受性是相同的,甚至更高。唯一的例外是,报告收入低于5万美元的参与者不太可能参与到项目的足够内容中,以了解在不同的CRC筛查测试中有选择(差异-10.4%,95% CI -20.1至-0.8)。值得注意的是,与白人参与者相比,黑人/非裔美国人参与者更有可能注册接收来自医生办公室的短信(差异18.7%,95% CI 7.0-30.3)。结论:研究结果表明,人们普遍接受短信来告知和支持CRC筛查共同决策。