Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| IDRCB:2023-A00859-36 | Other Identifier | ANSM |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to compare the effect of face-to-face training of general practitioners on the implementation of a shared decision (in the context of colorectal cancer screening), versus current practice (i.e. without training in the patient-centered approach).
Colorectal cancer (CRC) affects 95% of cases of people aged over 50 years old with an average age of diagnosis of 71 years for men and 73 years for women with a higher prevalence in women. By the age of 75, 4 out of 100 men and 3 out of 100 women will have developed colorectal cancer.
In France, CRC screening is based on a guaiac faecal occult blood test in subjects at risk average, carried out every 2 years from 50 to 74 years old. In the event of a positive test, a colonoscopy should be performed. Participation in the programme colorectal cancer screening has been declining since 2016-2017.
The implementation of screening faces many barriers on the physian's side and/or on the patient's side. During of the last 2020-2021 screening campaign, only 6.1 million people took a screening test, which represented a participation rate of 28.9%, while it is commonly admitted that a screening rate >50% would be necessary to reduce CRC mortality.
Some barriers are specific to CRC screening. for patient, reluctance to carry out screening, analysis of stools, and fear of cancer. For the physian, the discomfort in approaching screening and the uncertainty of the relevance of the test for some patients. The know-how and quality of information and communication with patients is at the forefront.
Physian must adapt their communication to the possibilities understanding of the subject to explain, convince, and bring the patient to carry out screening. Active listening is a technique particularly suitable for adopting a person-centred approach making it possible to take into account the patient perspectives in order to arrive at a shared decision.
This most often involves helping and giving the patient the means to manage their problems, involving them in a prevention project (non-requesting patient) or supporting them and motivating them in their approach (requesting patient).
The hypothesize of this study is that training general practitioners in a patient-centered approach will enable the implementation of greater shared decision-making work with the patient during a CRC screening presentation consultation.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventional arm | Experimental | The recruited GPs will be randomized into 2 parallel groups (interventional and control). Following this randomization, the GPs from the interventional group will undergo face-to-face training to the patient-centered approach. |
|
| Control arm | No Intervention | The GPs of the control group will take care the patient according to current screening recommendations and procedures organized by the colorectal cancer (CCR) mass screening. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| patient-centered approach training | Procedure | face to face training of general practitioner of interventional arm |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The Measurement of the achievement oh the shared decision shared decision making in CRC screening using the patient shared a self-decision-making questionnaire (SDM-Q9), validated in French | comparison of the mean of the SDM-Q9 between each arm of the study from 0 (weak shared decision) to 100 (strong shared decision). We will compare the average of the SDM-Q9 between each arm of the study | 6 to 8 months after after patient nclusion (carrying out the screening test) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluate the effect of training on the CRC screening rate | participation rate in organized CRC screening at individual level. Measurements taken 6 months after the last patient was included in the trial, | Measurements taken 6 months after the last patient was included in the trial, i.e. no later than 18 months after the start of the trial |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Patient aged 50 to 74:
Eligible for organized CRC screening,
Having declared as attending clinician a general practitioner investigator of the study
✓ Consulting their attending clinician for the duration of the study,
AND able and willing to comply with all trial requirements
Non inclusion Criteria:
- ✓ Screened for CRC less than 2 years ago
Not eligible for organized CRC screening:
History of adenomas or CRC:
- Family (1st degree)
Personal history of IBD:
Hereditary predispositions:
Patient with symptoms requiring colonoscopy
Having a level of literacy that does not allow the completion of the self-questionnaire.
Having an inability to give express consent.
Being under guardianship, curatorship or having cognitive disorders
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isabelle AUGER-AUBIN, Pr | Contact | 06 83 28 26 36 | isabelle.auger-aubin@u-paris.fr | |
| Josselin LeBel, Dr | Contact | 33 (0)1 57 27 74 64 | josselin.lebel@u-paris.fr |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Isabelle AUGER-AUBIN, Pr | cabinet de groupe pluriprofessionnel 40 rue Carnot 95230 Soisy-Sous-Montmorency | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cabinet de groupe pluriprofessionnel | Recruiting | Soisy-sous-Montmorency | 95230 | France |
Not provided
Patient-centered face-to-face training for General Practitioners on implementation of a shared decision
Not provided
Not provided
Patient not informed of the randomization arm to which their general practitioner enrolled
| Confronting the shared decision made by the patient regarding the completion of CRC screening |
Participation rate (IC95%) in CRC screening according to the patient's decision at the end of the initial consultation: wish to be screened, neutral, wish not to be screened. |
| Measurements taken 6 months after the last patient was included in the trial, i.e. no later than 18 months after the start of the trial |
| Explore understanding of the shared decision process among general practitioners and patients | Proportion (IC95%) of included patients with a SURE test result of less than 4 | Data collected immediately after the inclusion visit |