TY - JOUR
T1 - High Value Care in Cancer Surveillance and Screening
T2 - Evaluating an e-Curriculum for Primary Care Providers
AU - Choi, Youngjee
AU - Peairs, Kimberly S.
AU - Sateia, Heather F.
AU - Riddell, Rebecca
AU - Zhang, Christiana
AU - McGuire, Maura J.
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank instructional designer Caroline Lentz for her help creating the e-module. We would also like to acknowledge the Johns Hopkins Longitudinal Curriculum Development course faculty and 2017-2018 cohort, who gave us invaluable guidance and feedback on our curriculum. This project has received financial support from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Institute for Excellence in Education’s Small Grants Program. We are grateful to the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Office of Assessment and Evaluation for their statistical support.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, American Association for Cancer Education.
PY - 2022/10
Y1 - 2022/10
N2 - Background: With an expected shortage of oncologists, primary care providers (PCPs) may need to manage more cancer surveillance and screening, areas where educational resources for PCPs have been limited. The goal of this e-curriculum was for PCPs to learn surveillance and screening for several common cancers. Methods: The e-curriculum covered breast and colorectal cancer surveillance and lung cancer screening with (1) a pre-test assessing knowledge, attitudes, practice patterns, and confidence; (2) case vignette-based teaching; and (3) an immediate post-test (with knowledge and confidence items identical to the pre-test) providing feedback. A delayed post-test was administered several months later. The curriculum and test items were developed by content experts and evaluated in a primary care group practice. Results: Of 167 community PCPs, 152 completed the pre-test (91%), 145 completed the immediate post-test (87%), and 63 completed the delayed post-test (37%); 62 PCPs completed all three tests (37%). The median score on the pre-test was 43%, immediate post-test was 93%, and delayed post-test was 70%. For PCPs completing all three tests, the median scores were 50%, 90%, and 70%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The percentage of PCPs confident in their knowledge 4 to 6 months after module completion compared to the pre-test baseline was statistically significant for lung cancer screening but not for cancer surveillance. Conclusion: This curriculum provided concise, effective education for PCPs on 3 common cancers. Limitations include content breadth and lack of data reflecting physician ordering patterns. Curricular strengths include its accessibility, immediate feedback, and effectiveness, with a significant improvement in immediate and delayed post-test knowledge. Given a lack of increased confidence to provide cancer surveillance, PCPs should rely on electronic medical record tools and other resources to guide appropriate surveillance care.
AB - Background: With an expected shortage of oncologists, primary care providers (PCPs) may need to manage more cancer surveillance and screening, areas where educational resources for PCPs have been limited. The goal of this e-curriculum was for PCPs to learn surveillance and screening for several common cancers. Methods: The e-curriculum covered breast and colorectal cancer surveillance and lung cancer screening with (1) a pre-test assessing knowledge, attitudes, practice patterns, and confidence; (2) case vignette-based teaching; and (3) an immediate post-test (with knowledge and confidence items identical to the pre-test) providing feedback. A delayed post-test was administered several months later. The curriculum and test items were developed by content experts and evaluated in a primary care group practice. Results: Of 167 community PCPs, 152 completed the pre-test (91%), 145 completed the immediate post-test (87%), and 63 completed the delayed post-test (37%); 62 PCPs completed all three tests (37%). The median score on the pre-test was 43%, immediate post-test was 93%, and delayed post-test was 70%. For PCPs completing all three tests, the median scores were 50%, 90%, and 70%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The percentage of PCPs confident in their knowledge 4 to 6 months after module completion compared to the pre-test baseline was statistically significant for lung cancer screening but not for cancer surveillance. Conclusion: This curriculum provided concise, effective education for PCPs on 3 common cancers. Limitations include content breadth and lack of data reflecting physician ordering patterns. Curricular strengths include its accessibility, immediate feedback, and effectiveness, with a significant improvement in immediate and delayed post-test knowledge. Given a lack of increased confidence to provide cancer surveillance, PCPs should rely on electronic medical record tools and other resources to guide appropriate surveillance care.
KW - Cancer screening
KW - Cancer surveillance
KW - Education
KW - Primary care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102846567&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85102846567&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s13187-021-01986-4
DO - 10.1007/s13187-021-01986-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 33723797
AN - SCOPUS:85102846567
SN - 0885-8195
VL - 37
SP - 1472
EP - 1478
JO - Journal of Cancer Education
JF - Journal of Cancer Education
IS - 5
ER -