Patient-provider communication factors associated with mt-sDNA screening for colorectal cancer.

e22514 Background: Several colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests, shown to reduce CRC incidence and mortality, are recommended for average-risk adults aged 45-75 years. CRC screening is underutilized in the US with access to facility-based options, such as colonoscopy, representing a barrier to screening. Stool-based tests are guideline-endorsed and offer patients a convenient and more accessible CRC screening option that can be completed at home. Provider recommendation is consistently identified as the primary factor driving patient adherence. Understanding how aspects of patient-provider communication influence CRC screening can inform interventions to improve adherence. We developed a survey, informed by behavioral theory, to identify communication factors associated with completion of mt-sDNA screening. Methods: Adults aged 45-75 years, with a US postal address, who received a valid order for mt-sDNA and whose kit was shipped between 5/21-9/21 were eligible for sampling. The survey was administered by RTI International between 3/22-6/22. Participants could complete electronic or paper surveys. We fit a multivariable logistic regression to identify patient-provider communication factors associated with mt-sDNA test completion. Results: 2,973 respondents completed the survey (response rate = 21.7%). The majority (77.3%) completed the mt-sDNA test and said they would be ‘very likely’ (76.8%) to complete Cologuard in the future. The proportion of respondents who had conversations with their healthcare provider about Cologuard, and the specific content of those conversations, was significantly different between completers and non-completers and between respondents who said they were ‘very likely’ to complete Cologuard in the future compared to respondents who were not. Results from a binary logistic regression suggested that discussions with a healthcare provider related to step-by-step instructions for completing Cologuard (OR = 1.62) and needing to have a colonoscopy follow-up (OR = 1.93), as well as feeling included ‘a great deal’ in the decision-process with respondents’ healthcare provider (compared to ‘somewhat’ or ‘not at all’) increase the odds of kit completion. Additionally, healthcare provider discussions relating to test cost (OR = 1.47) and performance (OR = 1.72), as well as feeling included ‘a great deal’ in the decision-process was positively associated with respondents indicating they were ‘very likely’ to use Cologuard in the future. Provider discussions about the cost of a follow-up colonoscopy was negatively associated with a ‘very likely’ future user (OR = 0.52). Conclusions: Healthcare providers play a key role in patient adherence to CRC screening and must be appropriately prepared and resourced to educate and to engage patients in shared decision-making about CRC screening.