Impact of general practitioners' sex and age on systematic recommendation for cancer screening

Characteristics of primary-care providers have been associated with their patients' participation in breast cancer screening. A nationwide observational survey, 'EDIFICE', was conducted by telephone from December 2007 to January 2008 on a representative sample of 600 general practitioners (GPs) working in France, to investigate how a GP's characteristics may influence patient participation in screening for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. For breast cancer screening, systematic recommendation was associated with female physicians [odds ratio (OR) = 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-3.1]. This systematic recommendation was also correlated with systematic referral for colorectal cancer (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.0-2.5) and prostate cancer screening (OR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.8-4.1). For colorectal cancer screening, the sex of the GP had no significant impact. However, systematic recommendation for both breast and prostate cancer screening was shown to be associated with systematic recommendation for colorectal cancer screening (OR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.6-4.7 and OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.1-3.0, respectively). For prostate cancer screening, there was no significant sex specificity. However, systematic recommendation for both breast and colorectal cancer screening was associated with an advice on prostate cancer screening (OR = 2.9; 95% CI = 2.0-4.4 and OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.3-3.2, respectively). The age of the GP was not associated with a higher rate of systematic recommendation for screening for the three types of cancer. Male GPs were more likely than female GPs to perform digital rectal examinations on male patients (69 vs. 54%; OR = 1.86; 95% CI = 1.31-2.63). There is a global pattern of physicians being screening-prone (as suggested by the cross impact of recommendations from one cancer type to another). Although the frequency of systematic recommendation for breast cancer screening is higher with female GPs, systematic recommendation for prostate cancer is not higher among male GPs. The factors associated with systematic recommendation for screening are both a matter of concern and a target for action, to improve adherence of individuals through GP commitment. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 20:S39-S41 (C) 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.