Top

The European Journal of Health Economics

Published in:

01-06-2006 | Original Papers

The reasons of general practitioners for promoting colorectal cancer mass screening in France

Authors: Célia Berchi, Jean-Marc Dupuis, Guy Launoy

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 2/2006

Abstract

Implementation of colorectal cancer (CRC) mass screening is a public health priority. Obtaining the involvement of general practitioners (GPs) is crucial for ensuring participation by the general public. This study elicited GPs’ reasons for promoting CRC screening. The method used was discrete choice modeling. Questionnaires with a set of pairs of hypothetical screening scenarios were sent to 700 GPs. Factors influencing GPs’ screening practice were found to be: the effectiveness of the screening program, the proportion of false negatives and false positives, and their remuneration. Hence improving screening test sensitivity and setting up specific remuneration for conducting screening would help to increase GPs’ participation in CRC screening in France.

Available only for authorised users

Abelson J, Lomas J (1990) Do health service organizations and community health centres have higher disease prevention and health promotion levels than fee-for-service practices? Can Med Assoc J 142:575–581

Allison JE, Tekawa IS, Ransom LJ, Adrain AL (1996) A comparison of fecal occult-blood tests for colorectal cancer screening. N Engl J Med 334:155–159CrossRefPubMed

Berchi C, Bouvier V, Reaud JM, Launoy G (2004) Cost-effectiveness analysis of two strategies for mass screening for colorectal cancer in France. Health Econ 13:227–238CrossRefPubMed

Cairns J, van der Pol M, Lloyd A (2002) Decision making heuristics and the elicitation of preferences: being fast and frugal about the future. Health Econ 11:655–658CrossRefPubMed

Castiglione G, Sala P, Ciatto S, Grazzini G, Mazzota A, Rossetti C et al (1994) Comparative analysis of results of guaiac and immunochemical tests for faecal occult blood in colorectal cancer screening in two oncological institutions. Eur J Cancer Prev 3:399–405PubMed

Cole SR, Young GP, Byrne D, Guy JR, Morcom J (2002) Participation in screening for colorectal cancer based on a faecal occult blood test is improved by endorsement by the primary care practitioner. J Med Screen 9:147–152CrossRefPubMed

Drakopoulos SA (1994) Hierarchical choice in economics. J Econ Surv 8:133–153

Faivre J, Arveux P, Milan C, Durand G, Lamour J, Bedenne L (1991) Participation in mass screening for colorectal cancer: results of screening and rescreening from the Burgundy study. Eur J Cancer Prev 1:49–55

Farrar S, Ryan M (1999) Response ordering effects: a methodological issue in conjoint analysis. Health Econ 8:75–79CrossRefPubMed

10.

Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, Ludbrook A (2000) Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Soc Sci Med 50:63–75CrossRefPubMed

11.

Gyrd-Hansen D, Slothuus U (2002) The citizen’s preferences for financing public health care: a Danish survey. Int J Health Care Finance Econ 2:25–36CrossRefPubMed

12.

Gyrd-Hansen D, Sogaard J (2001) Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. Health Econ 10:617–634CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH et al (1996) Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 348:1472–1477CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hillman AL, Nuamah I (1998) Physician financial incentives and feedback: failure to increase cancer screening in Medicaid Managed Care. Am J Public Health 88:1699–1701PubMed

15.

Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O (1996) Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 348:1467–1471CrossRefPubMed

16.

Launoy G, Veret JL, Richir B, Reaud JM, Ollivier V, Valla A et al (1993) Involvement of general practitioners in mass screening. Experience of a colorectal cancer mass screening programme in the Calvados region ( France).Eur J Cancer Prev 2:229–232PubMed

17.

Launoy G, Herbert C, Vallée JP, Desoubeaux N, Réaud JM, Ollivier V et al (1996) Le dépistage de masse du cancer colorectal en France. Expérience auprès de 165 000 personnes dans le Calvados. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 20:228–236PubMed

18.

Launoy G, Herbert C (1998) Le dépistage de masse du cancer colorectal. L’état actuel en France. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 22: S34–39PubMed

19.

Launoy G, Bertrand H, Berchi C, Talbourdet V, Guizard AV, Bouvier V, Caces E (2005) Evaluation of an immunochemical fecal occult blood test with automated reading in screening for colorectal cancer in a general average-risk population. Int J Cancer 115:493–496CrossRefPubMed

20.

Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR et al (1993) Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 328:1365–1371CrossRefPubMed

21.

McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In P. Zarembka, Frontiers in econometrics. Academic: New York

22.

Nexoe J, Gyrd-Hansen D, Kragstrup J, Kristiansen IV, Nielsen JB (2002) Danish GPs’ perception of disease risk and benefit of prevention. Fam Pract 19:3–6CrossRefPubMed

23.

Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Teppo L, Thomas DB (2002) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol VIII. IARC: Lyon

24.

Remontet L, Estève J, Bouvier AM et al (2003) Cancer incidence and mortality in France over the period 1978–2000. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 51:3–30PubMed

25.

Ryan M (2000) Using choice experiments to elicit preferences: current practice and future challenges. In: Models of the patient-physician relationship and methods for eliciting patients’ preferences, no. 114. Ateliers de formation INSERM: France

26.

Scott A, Hall J (1995) Evaluating the effects of GP remuneration: problems and prospects. Health Policy 31:183–195CrossRefPubMed

27.

Scott A (2001) Eliciting GPs’ preferences for pecuniary and non-pecuniary job characteristics. J Health Econ 20:329–347CrossRefPubMed

28.

Scott A, Vick S (1999) Patients, doctors and contracts: an application of principal-agent theory to the doctor-patient relationship. Scott J Polit Econ 46:111–134CrossRef

29.

Taylor ML, Anderson RA (2002) Colorectal cancer screening: physician attitudes and practices. Wis Med J 101:39–43

30.

Tazi A, Faivre J, Lejeune C, Benhamiche AM, Dassonville F (1999) Performances du test Hemoccult dans le dépistage des cancers et des adénomes colorectaux. Résultats de cinq campagnes de dépistage en Saône-et-Loire. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 23:575–580

31.

Thurstone L (1927) A law of comparative judgement. Psychol Rev 34:273–286

32.

Truong TP, Hensher DA (1985) Measurement of travel time values and opportunity cost from a discrete choice model. Econ J 95:438–451

Title: The reasons of general practitioners for promoting colorectal cancer mass screening in France
Authors: Célia Berchi
Jean-Marc Dupuis
Guy Launoy
Publication date: 01-06-2006
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 2/2006
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-006-0339-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The reasons of general practitioners for promoting colorectal cancer mass screening in France

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2006

Economic impact of simplified de Gramont regimen in first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer

Outcomes research collaborations between third-party payers, academia, and pharmaceutical manufacturers

Choices and utilization in dental care

Factors influencing the costs of emergency medical admissions to an Irish teaching hospital

The future of imaging techniques for cancer patients in The Netherlands

Pharmaceutical policy in Italy