Influence of a Brief Intervention on CRC Screening

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Qualitative data were collected from 5 General Practionners (GPs) focus groups, 24 patient interviews and 35 recorded consultations from 9 GPs to explore colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in France The qualitative data indicated that improvement was needed in patient-centered communication. Educational material was developed based on these triangulated data with two different scenarios to improve communication with patients: one for a compliant patient, another for a non compliant patient The hypothesis is that a brief intervention on GPs can improve the patients' participation rate to colorectal screening Method : cluster randomized control trial (cluster unit : GPs practices) With a brief intervention on a randomized population of GPs in the district of Val d'Oise Inclusion criteria: GPs with a practice in the district of Val d'Oise and active in the colorectal mass screening

Detailed Description
-----------------
a cluster randomized controlled parallel groups study was conducted in the Val d'Oise department in France All practices of the Val d'Oise department were eligible to participate. Among 585 practices, an independent biostatistician randomized 50 practices per arm in October 2011 according to a computer generated randomization list.Two team members phone called all the GPS of the randomized practices. GPs from practices in the control group are asked to continue their usual care, as if they were not participating in this trial. GPs of both groups had to send their patients list to the research team to calculate their eligible population. They were also asked to list all the gFOBT delivered during the six months period of the study. GPs of the intervention group received a four hours educational training focused on patients' centered care.

Official Title
-----------------
Brief Intervention to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening

Conditions
-----------------
Colorectal Cancer

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: GPs communication skills and CRC screening


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Inclusion of GPs practices: All GPs practices of the Val d'Oise department in France were eligible to participate GPs using complementary therapies occasionally were allowed to participate Exclusion Criteria: Exclusion of GPs practices : practices were excluded when doctors used exclusively complementary therapies (acupuncture therapy, homeopathy….) -
Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Single


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| No Intervention: control group<br>GPs from practices in the control group are asked to continue their usual care, as if they were not participating in this trial. They had to send their patients list to the research team to calculate their eligible population. They were also asked to list all the gaiac Fecal occult blood test ( gFOBT) delivered during the six months period of the study. | |
| Active Comparator: intervention<br>GPs communication skills and CRC screening :the intervention was a four hours educational training for GPs of the intervention group focused on communication skills with a patients' centered care approach to improve patients participation at CRC screening | Behavioral: GPs communication skills and CRC screening<br>* GPs of the intervention group received a four hours educational training focused on patients' centered care to improve GPs communication skills and enhance patients'participation in CRC mass screening . Triangulation of all qualitative data was performed in order to develop educational material and training based on the six components of the Patient-Centered Clinical Method . Two different scenarios were developed: one for a compliant patient, another for a non-compliant patient. Two videos were made with doctor and simulated patient. Interactive methods were used to elaborate educational training including role playing, the presentation of the video followed by an interactive discussion.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| participation rate of patients for CRC screening | Comparison of the participation rate for patients for CRC screening among GPs belonging to the intervention group versus the participation rate for patients for CRC screening among GPs belonging to the control group | 7 months | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| GPs with a participation rate over 65% | the number of GPs who reached a patients participation rate of 65% during the study period because of the desirable level of uptake rate over 65% defined by the European guidelines of quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening | 7 months | 
| GPs participation rate over 45% | The number of Gps who reached a participation rate of 45% because of the acceptable level of uptake defined by the same guidelines , the number of gFOBT delivered by GPs during study period, | 7 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
cancer, CRC screening, communication