| Balanced (n=9) (FP=4; IM=5) |
|
|
tends to not recommend as the first line of screening for low-risk patients willing to refer patients if they ask for it experiences greater organizational acceptance and accessibility as a screening option for low-risk patients than in the past
|
likes to discuss and encourage some form of scoping, whether that be FS or colonoscopy explains none of the 3 screening options are “perfect” but that all 3 are acceptable screening methods gives all 3 screening options as choices to patients after describing risk/benefit and practical issues (scheduling) with patients tends to let the patient guide/decide which screening option feels most appropriate for them
|
| FOBT (n=3) (FP=2; IM=1) |
|
tends to not emphasize or recommend to patients believes it is less accurate than colonoscopy with the same patient risks and burden believes FS does not “add anything” to yearly stool cards believes the organizational recommendation is to move away from FS as a screening option
|
believes it is the preferred method of scoping over FS willing to refer patients for screening colonoscopy if patient asks or is willing experiences greater organizational acceptance and accessibility as a screening option for low-risk patients than in the past
|
always tries to “sell” the stool test as the first line of screening in low-risk patients doesn’t typically discuss FS as an option always discusses the risks and benefits of FOBT and colonoscopy
|
| FOBT&FS (n=5) (FP=3; IM=2) |
belief in efficacy of yearly stool test always encourages yearly stool test believes FOBT is the “bare minimum” but encourages scoping as well
|
Belief in the efficacy of FS as screening method Believes FS is equal to or just as good as colonoscopy, especially if paired w/ stool test Believes it is a test that is less risky and burdensome to patients and with good benefit Believes FS&FOBT combination is the screening approach recommended by organizational experts
|
believes this is not a “perfect” or risk free test believes that there is not a clear recommendation organizationally or nationally that this is the best screening option for low-risk patients concerned the risks of the test may outweigh the benefits to low-risk patients concerned about not over-referring for colonoscopies and potentially burdening the system will refer patients for colonoscopy if they ask for/demand one
|
tends to recommend the FS&FOBT combination for patients asking for guidance or expressing uncertainty as to which scoping procedure to obtain -
emphasizes the accuracy of FS along with benefits of it over colonoscopy, including:
less preparation time; less potential bowel damage / perforation risk; fewer issues with sedation; easier to access; and less life burden (time off work)
|
| Colonoscopy & FOBT (n=3); (IM=1; FP=2) |
always encourages yearly stool test expresses some concern over the accuracy of the test as a “stand alone” screening option believes FOBT is the “bare minimum” and often encourages scoping as well finds it challenging to get patients to complete the stool test
|
believes FS is not as good as colonoscopy believes FS has the same level of preparation and risk burden to the patient with potentially less benefit concerned FS is not as accurate of a scoping procedure and that the data shows it misses cancer
|
strong belief colonoscopy is the best scoping method and is preferable over FS willing to refer patients for screening colonoscopies if patient asks or is willing experiences greater organizational acceptance and accessibility as a screening option for low-risk patients than in the past
|
along with FOBT, likely to encourage colonoscopy at some point with patients emphasizes the accuracy of colonoscopies tends to talk patients out FS or not recommend it at all always discusses the risks and benefits of colonoscopy and FOBT
|
