Psychosocial variables associated with colorectal cancer screening in South Australia

Comparing a fecal immunochemical test and circulating tumor DNA blood test for colorectal cancer screening adherence

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are most effective at reducing disease incidence and mortality through sustained screening participation. A novel blood test modality is being explored for CRC screening, but it is unclear whether it will provide sustained screening participation. This study aimed to investigate whether a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) blood test improved CRC screening re-participation when compared with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and to define the predictors of sustained CRC screening in an Australian population.

METHODS

South Australians who initially participated in CRC screening using a ctDNA blood test (n = 36) or FIT (n = 547) were offered the same CRC screening test approximately 2 years later through an extended phase of a randomized controlled trial. Surveys collected demographic, psychosocial, and clinical information. Predictors of CRC screening re-participation were explored using chi-square, Wilcoxon tests, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Participants offered a second ctDNA blood test were equally likely to re-participate in CRC screening as those who completed a FIT in the first round and who were offered the same test (61% vs 66% re-participation respectively, P = 0.6). CRC fatalism, health activation, and self-efficacy were associated with repeated screening participation. Test awareness was predictive of repeated FIT-based CRC screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted interventions to improve CRC screening awareness and increase patient health activation may improve CRC screening adherence. A ctDNA blood test may be a suitable CRC screening option to maintain CRC screening adherence in people who do not participate in screening with FIT.

The role of disgust as an emotional barrier to colorectal cancer screening participation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Worldwide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are suboptimal. This systematic review and meta-analysis examine the role of disgust in CRC screening avoidance.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search was conducted. In all, 46 studies were included in the review. Among these, 16 studies were compared with a meta-analytical approach in order to 1) estimate the effect size of state disgust on screening intention and attendance; 2) examine whether methodological characteristics moderate the effect of state disgust on screening behaviour; 3) estimate the effect sizes of trait disgust and type of exam kit on state disgust.

RESULTS

In the reviewed studies, state disgust was often associated with CRC screening and especially with CRC screening avoidance. The meta-analysis confirmed low-to-moderate negative effects of state disgust on screening intention and attendance. Population sampling strategy was the only significant moderator of the effect of state disgust on screening attendance, i.e. studies that used convenience (versus random/representative) samples found a significantly lower effect size. Trait disgust and type of exam kit exerted a large and a moderate-to-large positive effect, respectively, on state disgust.

CONCLUSIONS

Disgust can boost CRC screening avoidance. Further studies and interventions must be designed to help patients in overcoming this emotional barrier.

Patient attitudes towards changes in colorectal cancer surveillance: An application of the Health Belief Model

OBJECTIVE

This is to determine whether health beliefs regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening could predict discomfort with a change to CRC surveillance proposing regular faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) instead of colonoscopy.

METHODS

Eight hundred individuals enrolled in a South Australian colonoscopy surveillance programme were invited to complete a survey on surveillance preferences. Responses were analysed using binary logistic regression predicting discomfort with a hypothetical FIT-based surveillance change. Predictor variables included constructs based on the Health Belief Model: perceived threat of CRC, perceived confidence to complete FIT and colonoscopy (self-efficacy), perceived benefits from current surveillance and perceived barriers to FIT and colonoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 408 participants (51%) returned the survey (complete data n = 303; mean age 62 years, 52% male). Most participants (72%) were uncomfortable with FIT-based surveillance reducing colonoscopy frequency. This attitude was predicted by a higher perceived threat of CRC (OR = 1.03 [95% CI 1.01-1.04]), higher colonoscopy self-efficacy (OR = 1.34 [95% CI 1.13-1.59]) and lower perceived barriers to colonoscopy (OR = 0.92 [95% CI 0.86-0.99]).

CONCLUSIONS

Health beliefs regarding colonoscopy and perceived threat of CRC may be important to consider when changing CRC surveillance protocols. If guideline changes were introduced, these factors should be addressed to provide patients reassurance concerning the efficacy of the alternative protocol.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Have We Addressed Concerns and Needs of the Target Population?

Despite the recognized benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, uptake is still suboptimal in many countries. In addressing this issue, one important element that has not received sufficient attention is population preference. Our review provides a comprehensive summary of the up-to-date evidence relative to this topic. Four OVID databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Biological Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, and Global Health. Among the 742 articles generated, 154 full texts were selected for a more thorough evaluation based on predefined inclusion criteria. Finally, 83 studies were included in our review. The general population preferred either colonoscopy as the most accurate test, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as the least invasive for CRC screening. The emerging blood test (SEPT9) and capsule colonoscopy (nanopill), with the potential to overcome the pitfalls of the available techniques, were also favored. Gender, age, race, screening experience, education and beliefs, the perceived risk of CRC, insurance, and health status influence one’s test preference. To improve uptake, CRC screening programs should consider offering test alternatives and tailoring the content and delivery of screening information to the public’s preferences. Other logistical measures in terms of the types of bowel preparation, gender of endoscopist, stool collection device, and reward for participants can also be useful.

"Rescue" of Nonparticipants in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Three Noninvasive Test Options

Few studies have directly targeted nonparticipants in colorectal cancer screening to identify effective engagement strategies. We undertook a randomized controlled trial that targeted nonparticipants in a previous trial of average-risk subjects which compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, a blood test or a choice of either. Nonparticipants (n = 899) were randomized to be offered a kit containing a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), directions on how to arrange a blood DNA test, or the option of doing either. Screening participation was assessed 12 weeks after the offer. To assess the cognitive and attitudinal variables related to participation and invitee choice, invitees were surveyed after 12 weeks, and associations were investigated using multinomial logistic regression. Participation rates were similar between groups (P = 0.88): 12.0% for FIT (35/292), 13.3% for the blood test (39/293), and 13.4% for choice (39/290). Within the choice group, participation was significantly higher with FIT (9.7%, 28/290) compared with the blood test (3.8%, 11/290, P = 0.005). The only variable significantly associated with participation was socioeconomic status when offered FIT, and age when offered choice but there was none when offered the blood test. Survey respondents indicated that convenience, time-saving, comfort, and familiarity were major influences on participation. There was no clear advantage between a fecal test, blood test, or choice of test although, when given a choice, the fecal test was preferred. Differences in variables associated with participation according to invitation strategy warrant consideration when deciding upon an invitation strategy for screening nonparticipants. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This trial of screening for those at average risk for colorectal cancer targeted past fecal-test nonparticipants and compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, blood test, or choice of either. Although there was no clear advantage between strategies, factors associated with participation differed between each strategy.

Factors affecting patient adherence to publicly funded colorectal cancer screening programmes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer. Many countries in Europe have already implemented systematic screening programmes as per the recommendations by the European Union. The impact of screening is highly dependent on participation rates. The aim of the study was to identify barriers, facilitators and modifiers to participation in systematised, stool sample-based, publicly financed CRC screening programmes.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar and PsycINFO was undertaken. We included both qualitative and quantitative studies reporting on barriers and facilitators (excluding sociodemographic variables) to participation in stool sample-based CRC screening. Barriers and facilitators to participation were summarised and analysed.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met in 21 studies. Reported barriers and facilitators were categorised into the following seven themes (examples): psychology (fear of cancer), religion (believing cancer is the will of God), logistics (not knowing how to conduct the test), health-related factors (mental health), knowledge and awareness (lack of knowledge about the test), role of the general practitioner (being supported in taking the test by the general practitioner), and environmental factors (knowing someone who has participated in a screening programme). Six studies reported that non-participation was not due to a negative attitude towards screening for CRC.

CONCLUSION

Many barriers to screening were found. It is important to work with peoples' fear of screening. Moreover, this review suggests that it might be possible to increase participation rates, if the population-wide awareness and knowledge of potential health benefits of CRC screening are increased and proper logistical support is provided.

Individual and Geospatial Characteristics Associated With Use and Nonuse of the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) for Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Urban Minority Population

PURPOSE

Initiatives by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as well as the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable aim to increase the rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We assess individual and geographic characteristics associated fecal immunochemical test (FIT) CRC screening over 3 years.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 1500 FIT kits which were mailed or opportunistically handed to eligible participants in Brooklyn, New York from January 2014 to December 2016. Eligibility criteria included increased risk for colon cancer, uninsured or underinsured, and a minimum age of 50 years to warrant CRC screening. We looked at the association of individual demographic characteristics and FIT screening by logistic regression using SPPS version 23 software. In addition, using ArcGIS, we coded patients address and layered census tract population information to find associations.

RESULTS

In total, 1367 Cancer Services Participants met our study criteria. The study sample was predominantly female (95.2%) and minority (46% African American, 24.7% Hispanic, 17.3% Caucasian, 11.4% Asian) and on average 59 years old (SD, 5.7). A large majority (73%) had household incomes below $20,000/year. Approximately half (49.9%) of all Cancer Services Participants returned their FIT kit. In participants who did not return their FIT kit, the majority were African American (41%), followed by Hispanics (26.5%), Caucasians (20.6%), and Asians (11.8%). Multivariable logistic regression showed that a screening history of prior colonoscopy or FIT, gender, ethnicity, and educational attainment were significantly associated with FIT CRC screening uptake (P<0.05). Geospatial mapping showed clusters of low screening uptake in areas of high poverty. Hot-spot analysis identified areas of significant vulnerability.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT uptake remains suboptimal. Individual predictors as well as area poverty is associated with low screening uptake. Geospatial mapping is an effective tool for evaluating CRC screening uptake.

Considering anticipated regret may reduce colorectal cancer screening intentions: a randomised controlled trial

Objective: Regular screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) can substantially improve outcomes. This study investigated how measuring regret expected from failing to screen might lead to stronger screening intentions. Five potential moderators were evaluated: perceived threat, psychological reactance, prior screening participation, concurrently measuring faecal aversion (FA) and anticipated regret (AR). Design: A 2 (AR measured pre/post intention) × 2 (FA measured pre/post intention) single blind parallel randomised controlled trial was used. Australians aged 45 and over completed an online survey measuring AR, FA, intention, theory of planned behaviour variables and potential moderators. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was CRC screening intention. Results: Eight hundred and three participants were randomised, with 666 analysed. Measuring AR prior to intention unexpectedly resulted in a significantly lower intention to screen (d = 0.18, 95% CI [0.03, 0.33]) compared to measuring after intention. Trait reactance predicted a significantly lower intention when it was at least 0.52 SD above the mean; other moderators were not supported. Conclusion: The processes underlying anticipated regret manipulations must be better understood in order to have practical value in health promotion. More research is required to determine how to minimise or avoid the apparent negative effects of psychological reactance in CRC screening communication. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618001098224 http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12618001098224.aspx.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Testing Provision of Fecal and Blood Test Options on Participation for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Suboptimal participation is commonly observed in colorectal cancer screening programs utilizing fecal tests. This randomized controlled trial tested whether the offer of a blood test as either a "rescue" strategy for fecal test nonparticipants or an upfront choice, could improve participation. A total of 1,800 people (50-74 years) were randomized to control, rescue, or choice groups (n = 600/group). All were mailed a fecal immunochemical test (FIT, OC-Sensor, Eiken Chemical Company) and a survey assessing awareness of the screening tests. The rescue group was offered a blood test 12 weeks after FIT nonparticipation. The choice group was given the opportunity to choose to do a blood test (Colvera, Clinical Genomics) instead of FIT at baseline. Participation with any test after 24 weeks was not significantly different between groups (control, 37.8%; rescue, 36.9%; choice, 33.8%; P > 0.05). When the rescue strategy was offered after 12 weeks, an additional 6.5% participated with the blood test, which was greater than the blood test participation when offered as an upfront choice (1.5%; P < 0.001). Awareness of the tests was greater for FIT than for blood (96.2% vs. 23.1%; P < 0.0001). In a population familiar with FIT screening, provision of a blood test either as a rescue of FIT nonparticipants or as an upfront choice did not increase overall participation. This might reflect a lack of awareness of the blood test for screening compared with FIT.

Uptake of a colorectal cancer screening blood test in people with elevated risk for cancer who cannot or will not complete a faecal occult blood test

Participation rates in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are low. Nonparticipation is commonly attributed to psychosocial factors, but some medical conditions also prevent screening. These barriers might be partially overcome if a blood test for CRC screening was available. This study determined whether people who had always declined screening by FOBT would participate if offered a blood test. An audit of registrants within a personalized CRC screening programme was undertaken to determine the reasons for regular nonparticipation in FOBT. Consistent nonparticipants (n=240) were randomly selected and invited for CRC screening with a blood test. Demographic characteristics and the reasons for prior FOBT nonparticipation were collected by means of a questionnaire. Nonparticipation in the screening programme could be classified as either behavioural (8.6%), with consistent noncompliance, or due to medical contraindications (8.5%), which included chronic rectal bleeding, being deemed unsuitable by a health professional, and needing personal assistance. Blood test uptake was 25%, with participation in the medical contraindications group greater than that in the behavioural group (43 vs. 12%, P<0.001). Reported behavioural reasons for nonparticipation in faecal immunochemical test included procrastination and dislike of the test, but these were not associated with blood test uptake (P>0.05). There is a subgroup of the community who have medical reasons for nonparticipation in CRC screening with FOBT but will participate if offered a blood test. The option of a blood test does not, however, improve uptake in those who admit to behavioural reasons for noncompliance with screening.

Faecal occult blood testing (FOBT)-based colorectal cancer screening trends and predictors of non-use: findings from the South Australian setting and implications for increasing FOBT uptake

Objective The present study used data from three South Australian population health surveys to examine trends in knowledge, recent use and reasons for use or non-use of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening from 2011 to 2014. Screening awareness and demographic factors related to non-use were also examined. Methods FOBT trends were examined for respondents aged 50–75 years across survey years (n ~ 1000). Logistic regression analyses were undertaken to determine predictors of non-use and reasons for non-use of FOBT based on latest data. Results The proportion of respondents reporting recent FOBT use has trended up, whereas the proportion reporting non-use has trended down. Awareness of screening recommendations has increased. Respondents who were aware of screening recommendations and those aged 65–69 years were significantly less likely to report non-use. The most commonly reported reasons for FOBT use were as part the national screening program or routine examination, whereas reasons for non-use were not having symptoms and doctor not advising to have the test. Conclusions FOBT screening trends are indicative of the positive effect of the continued expansion of the national screening program. FOBT uptake may be increased by addressing salient barriers, as indicated by persisting reasons for non-use of FOBT. What is known about the topic? Australia has one of the highest age-standardised incidence rates of CRC (or bowel cancer) in the world. Population screening using non-invasive stool-based FOBT was implemented in Australia in 2006 with the introduction of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). To date, the NBCSP has been extended to only a small proportion of the target population and FOBT screening rates remain well below desired levels to effect changes in CRC outcomes at the population level. There is a recognised need for more robust data on CRC screening practices to inform interventions aimed at increasing FOBT uptake, beyond the scope of the NBCSP. What does this paper add? The study provides valuable insights into trends of FOBT screening indicators over time in the South Australia, drawing on data from population state health surveys undertaken from 2011 to 2014. A particular advantage of the dataset was that it included data on reasons for use and non-use of FOBT. These data are not routinely assessed in population-level studies of FOBT uptake, although such information would be beneficial for tracking implementation of the national program and identifying salient barriers to FOBT uptake in low-participation groups. Thus, the study also describes factors related to non-use and reasons for non-use of FOBT among the target population for CRC screening. What are the implications for practitioners? Results suggest that there have been considerable shifts in community knowledge and FOBT screening participation rates from 2011 to 2014, reflecting the positive effect of the NBCSP. Reliance on physician recommendation to screen, as well as knowledge deficits related to screening frequency and the perceived relevance of screening remain prominent barriers to FOBT uptake. Recommendations for increasing FOBT uptake are made in view of salient barriers and identified segments of the population less likely to report FOBT use.

The impact of sample type and procedural attributes on relative acceptability of different colorectal cancer screening regimens

OBJECTIVE

In Australia and other countries, participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using fecal occult blood testing is low. Previous research suggests that fecal sampling induces disgust, so approaches not involving feces may increase participation. This study aimed to determine population preferences for CRC screening tests that utilize different sample collections (stool, blood, and saliva) and the extent to which specific attributes (convenience, performance, and cost) impact this preference.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

People aged 50-74 years completed a survey. Preference for screening for CRC through stool, blood, and saliva was judged through ranking of preference and attributes critical to preference and confirmed via a discrete choice experiment (DCE) where test attributes were described as varying by performance, cost, and sample type. Participants also completed a measure of aversion to sample type.

RESULTS

A total of 1,282 people participated in the survey. The DCE and ranking exercise confirmed that all test attributes had a statistically significant impact on respondents' preferences (P < 0.001). Blood and saliva were equally preferred over stool; however, test performance was the most influential attribute. In multivariable analyses, those who preferred blood to stool collection exhibited higher aversion to fecal (OR = 1.17; P ≤ 0.001) and saliva (OR = 1.06; P ≤ 0.05) sampling and perceived that they had less time for home sample collection (OR = 0.72, P ≤ 0.001). Those who preferred saliva to stool had higher aversion to fecal (OR = 1.15; P ≤ 0.001) and blood (OR = 1.06, P ≤ 0.01) sampling and less time for home sample collection (OR = 0.81, P ≤ 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Aversion to sample type and perceived inconvenience of sample collection are significant drivers of screening preference. While blood and saliva sampling were the most preferred methods, test performance was the most important attribute of a screening test, regardless of sample type. Efforts to increase CRC screening participation should focus on a test, or combination of tests, that combines the attributes of high performance, low aversion, and convenience of use.

An investigation of the emotion of disgust as an affective barrier to intention to screen for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation remains unacceptably low. This study investigated the emotion of disgust as a potential deterrent to intention to screen for CRC. The study utilised a convenience sample of individuals' 40-70 years of age to complete an online survey. Participants included 30 men and 118 women recruited between December 1, 2013 and March 31, 2014. Data on socio-demographics, health status, screening intentions and emotional barriers to bowel screening were collected via an on-line survey. Logistic regression analysis was utilised to investigate predictors of screening intention. Individuals were more likely to report intention to screen if they had prior screening experience, and reported fewer emotional concerns to screening for CRC. Results implicate disgust as a predictor of screening avoidance among participants. Specifically, higher reported faecal disgust was predictive of a 3% decrease in screening intention. This study was the first to empirically position disgust alongside other negative emotional states as an affective barrier to screening for CRC. Trait disgust sensitivity was not a reliable predictor of screening intention. This research suggests that anticipated faecal disgust may contribute to avoidance of screening for CRC.

Improving Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Randomised Controlled Trial of Sequential Offers of Faecal then Blood Based Non-Invasive Tests

BACKGROUND

Poor participation rates are often observed in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs utilising faecal occult blood tests. This may be from dislike of faecal sampling, or having benign bleeding conditions that can interfere with test results. These barriers may be circumvented by offering a blood-based DNA test for screening. The aim was to determine if program participation could be increased by offering a blood test following faecal immunochemical test (FIT) non-participation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

People were invited into a CRC screening study through their General Practice and randomised into control or intervention (n=600/group). Both groups were mailed a FIT (matching conventional screening programs). Participation was defined as FIT completion within 12wk. Intervention group non-participants were offered a screening blood test (methylated BCAT1/IKZF1). Overall participation was compared between the groups.

RESULTS

After 12wk, FIT participation was 82% and 81% in the control and intervention groups. In the intervention 96 FIT non- participants were offered the blood test - 22 completed this test and 19 completed the FIT instead. Total screening in the intervention group was greater than the control (88% vs 82%, p<0.01). Of 12 invitees who indicated that FIT was inappropriate for them (mainly due to bleeding conditions), 10 completed the blood test (83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Offering a blood test to FIT non-participants increased overall screening participation compared to a conventional FIT program. Blood test participation was particularly high in invitees who considered FIT to be inappropriate for them. A blood test may be a useful adjunct test within a FIT program.

Analysis of participant satisfaction in the Barcelona colorectal cancer screening programme: Positive evaluation of the community pharmacy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Population-based bowel screening programmes with faecal occult blood (FOB) tests need to achieve high uptake rates and offer quality services. We invited participants in the Barcelona Programme to complete a satisfaction survey, in order to explore factors influencing uptake and respondents' opinion and satisfaction with each step of the screening process.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Telephone survey using an ad hoc questionnaire (see annex) administered to a final sample of 1189 people: 310 non-participants in the programme (NoP), 553 participants with a negative test result (PNeg), and 326 participants with a positive result (PPos).

RESULTS

High scores were obtained for the clarity of the information provided by the programme (mean 8.9 on a scale 0-10), and for the accessibility and attention at the pharmacy as well as its role as the point for collection and return of FOB test cards (mean >9.3). Aspects that were not so highly rated were: preparation for the colonoscopy (41.6% reported quite a lot or a lot of discomfort), and to a lesser extent telephone accessibility (27.1% reported some difficulties). Participants also expressed concern about receiving a positive test result by telephone (78.9% reported some concern).

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents' opinion of the programme was positive overall, and supports the pharmacy as the point for distributing and collecting FOB test cards, as well as the role of the pharmacist in the context of the programme. Some aspects of the screening process will be reviewed in order to improve participant satisfaction and eventually increase uptake.

Blood-based screening for bowel cancer may not resolve suboptimal screening participation in Australia

OBJECTIVE

Emerging blood-based screening technologies for bowel cancer may improve screening participation compared to at-home stool sampling. This study assessed the impact of different screening delivery scenarios with increasing health system interactions on sampling preferences and likelihood of screening participation.

METHODS

N=1,561 persons aged 45 to 74 years completed a behavioural survey measuring demographics, readiness to screen, overall collection method preference, and proposed participation in stool and blood methods across four screening scenarios differing in terms of the number of required health system interactions.

RESULTS

Overall, respondents preferred a blood test (79.6%) compared to a stool test (20.4%). However, increasing health system interactions had a strong impact on the likelihood of participating in either sampling method (p<0.001). Moreover, likelihood of participating in each of the four blood-screening scenarios was significantly lower than the current at-home stool sampling approach (all p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Blood-based screening methods require increased contact with the health system but these interactions have negative impact on screening likelihood. All blood-based scenarios showed lower screening likelihood ratings than the current at-home FIT approach. Thus, blood-based screening may not resolve suboptimal screening participation rates in Australia.

Patient Beliefs About Colon Cancer Screening

Only about half of eligible individuals undergo colon cancer screening. We have limited knowledge about the patient beliefs that adversely affect screening decisions and about which beliefs might be amenable to change through education. As part of a clinical trial, 641 rural Iowans, aged 52 to 79 years, reported their beliefs about colon cancer screening in response to a mailed questionnaire. Consenting subjects were randomized into four groups, which were distinguished by four levels of increasingly intensive efforts to promote screening. Two of the groups received mailed educational materials and completed a follow-up questionnaire, which allowed us to determine whether their beliefs about screening changed following the education. We also completed a factor analysis to identify underlying (latent) factors that might explain the responses to 33 questions about readiness, attitudes, and perceived barriers related to colon cancer screening. The strongest predictors of a patient's stated readiness to be screened were a physician's recommendation to be screened (1 point difference on 10-point Likert scale, 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.5 to 1.6 point difference), a family history of colon cancer (0.85-point Likert scale difference, 95 % CI, 0.1 to 1.6), and a belief that health-care decisions should be mostly left to physicians rather than patients (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.21, P < .001). Of the 33 questionnaire items about screening beliefs, 11 (33 %) changed favorably following the educational intervention. In the factor analysis, the 33 items were reduced to 8 underlying factors, such as being too busy to undergo screening and worries about screening procedures. We found a limited number of underlying factors that may help explain patient resistance to colon cancer screening.

Self-perceived Mental Health Status and Uptake of Fecal Occult Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Canada: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

While colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most preventable causes of cancer mortality, it is one of the leading causes of cancer death in Canada where CRC screening uptake is suboptimal. Given the increased rate of mortality and morbidity among mental health patients, their condition could be a potential barrier to CRC screening due to greater difficulties in adhering to behaviours related to long-term health goals. Using a population-based study among Canadians, we hypothesize that self-perceived mental health (SPMH) status and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) uptake for the screening of CRC are associated.

METHODS

The current study is cross-sectional and utilised data from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2011-2012. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was undertaken to assess whether SPMH is independently associated with FOBT uptake among a representative sample of 11 386 respondents aged 50-74 years.

RESULTS

Nearly half of the respondents reported having ever had FOBT for CRC screening, including 37.28% who have been screened within two years of the survey and 12.41% who had been screened more than two years preceding the survey. Respondents who reported excellent mental health were more likely to have ever been screened two years or more before the survey (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.08; 95% CI, 1.00-4.43) and to have been screened in the last two years preceding the survey (AOR = 1.53; 95% CI, 0.86-2.71) than those reported poor mental health status.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the association between SPMH status and FOBT uptake for CRC screening. While the efforts to maximize CRC screening uptake should be deployed to all eligible people, those with poor mental health may need more attention.

A Blood Test for Methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 vs. a Fecal Immunochemical Test for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia

Objectives:

To compare the performance of a new blood test for colorectal cancer (CRC) to an established fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a study population with the full range of neoplastic and non-neoplastic pathologies encountered in the colon and rectum.

Methods:

Volunteers were asked to complete a FIT prior to colonoscopy. Blood was collected after bowel preparation but prior to colonoscopy, and plasma was assayed for the presence of methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 DNA using a multiplex real-time PCR assay. Sensitivity and specificity estimates for the blood test were calculated from true- and false-positive rates for neoplasia and compared with FIT at a range of fecal hemoglobin (Hb) concentration positivity thresholds.

Results:

In total, 1,381 volunteers (median age 64 years; 49% male) completed both tests prior to colonoscopy. Estimated sensitivity of the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test for CRC was 62% (41/66; 95% confidence interval 49–74%) with a specificity of 92% (1207/1315; 90–93%). FIT returned the same specificity at a cutoff of 60 μg Hb/g, at which its corresponding sensitivity for cancer was 64% (42/66; 51–75%). In the range of commonly used FIT cutoffs, respective cancer sensitivity and specificity estimates with FIT were: 59% (46–71%) and 93% (92–95%) at 80 μg Hb/g, and 79% (67–88%) and 81% (78–83%) at 10 μg Hb/g. Although estimated sensitivities were not significantly different between the two tests for any stage of cancer, FIT showed a significantly higher sensitivity for advanced adenoma at the lower cutoffs. Specificity of FIT, but not of the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test, deteriorated substantially in people with overt blood in the feces. When combining FIT (cutoff 10 μg Hb/g) with the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test, sensitivity for cancer was 89% (79–96%) at 74% (72–77%) specificity.

Conclusions:

A test based on detection of methylated BCAT1/IKZF1 DNA in blood has comparable sensitivity but better specificity for CRC than FIT at the commonly used positivity threshold of 10 μg Hb/g. Further evaluation of the new test relative to FIT in the population screening context is now required to fully understand the potential advantages and disadvantages of these biomarkers in screening.

Factors associated with use and non-use of the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kit for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Response to a 2012 outreach screening program: a survey study

Background

The one-sample fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is gaining popularity for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of average-risk people. However, uptake and annual use remain suboptimal.

Methods

In 2013, we mailed questionnaires to three groups of nonHispanic White, Black, and Latino Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) members ages 52–76 who received FIT kits in 2010–2012: Continuers did the FIT all 3 years; Converts in 2012, but not 2010 or 2011; and Nonusers in none of the 3 years. The questionnaires covered social influences, perceived CRC risk, reasons for using (Continuers, Converts) or avoiding using (Nonusers) the FIT, and recommendations for improving the kit.

Results

Continuers (n = 607, response rate 67.5 %), Converts (n = 317, response rate 35.6 %), and Nonusers (n = 215, response rate 21.1 %) did not differ in perceived risk or family history of CRC, but Nonusers were less likely than Continuers and Converts to know someone who had polyps or CRC. Continuers, Converts, and Nonusers did not differ in social network encouragement of CRC screening, but did differ in believing that it was very important that they be screened (88.3 %, 68.4 %, 47.7 %) and that their medical team thought it very important that they be screened (88.6 %, 79.9 %, 53.9 %). Approximately half of Continuers and Converts completed the FIT to please their doctor. Converts were less likely than Continuers to use the FIT to “make sure they were OK” (53.7 % vs. 72.6 %) or “protect their health” (46.1 % vs. 76.4 %). Nearly half of Converts completed the FIT out of guilt. Approximately half of FIT kit users suggested adding a disposable glove, extra paper, and wider-mouth tube to the kit. Nonusers’ reasons for not using the FIT included discomfort, disgust, or embarrassment (59.6 %); thinking it unnecessary (32.9 %); fatalism/fear (15.5 %); and thinking it too difficult to use (14.5 %), but <10 % did not want CRC screening at all.

Conclusions

Nonusers and irregular users of the FIT are less intrinsically motivated to get CRC screening than long-term users and more averse to preparing their stool sample. Changes to the FIT kit to address discomfort and difficulty factors might improve uptake and continued use.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1908-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A randomised controlled trial of personalised decision support delivered via the internet for bowel cancer screening with a faecal occult blood test: the effects of tailoring of messages according to social cognitive variables on participation

BACKGROUND

In Australia, bowel cancer screening participation using faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is low. Decision support tailored to psychological predictors of participation may increase screening. The study compared tailored computerised decision support to non-tailored computer or paper information. The primary outcome was FOBT return within 12 weeks. Additional analyses were conducted on movement in decision to screen and change on psychological variables.

METHODS

A parallel, randomised controlled, trial invited 25,511 people aged 50-74 years to complete an eligibility questionnaire. Eligible respondents (n = 3,408) were assigned to Tailored Personalised Decision Support (TPDS), Non-Tailored PDS (NTPDS), or Control (CG) (intention-to-treat, ITT sample). TPDS and NTPDS groups completed an on-line baseline survey (BS) and accessed generic information. The TPDS group additionally received a tailored intervention. CG participants completed a paper BS only. Those completing the BS (n = 2270) were mailed an FOBT and requested to complete an endpoint survey (ES) that re-measured BS variables (per-protocol, PP sample).

RESULTS

FOBT return: In the ITT sample, there was no significant difference between any group (χ (2)(2) = 2.57, p = .26; TPDS, 32.5%; NTPDS, 33%; and CG, 34.5%). In the PP sample, FOBT return in the internet groups was significantly higher than the paper group (χ (2)(2) = 17.01, p < .001; TPDS, 80%; NTPDS, 83%; and CG, 74%). FOBT completion by TPDS and NTPDS did not differ (χ (2)(1) = 2.23, p = .13). Age was positively associated with kit return. Decision to screen: 2227/2270 of the PP sample provided complete BS data. Participants not wanting to screen at baseline (1083/2227) and allocated to TPDS and NTPDS were significantly more likely to decide to screen and return an FOBT than those assigned to the CG. FOBT return by TPDS and NTPDS did not differ from one another (OR = 1.16, p = .42). Change on psychosocial predictors: Analysis of change indicated that salience and coherence of screening and self-efficacy were improved and faecal aversion decreased by tailored messaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Online information resources may have a role in encouraging internet-enabled people who are uncommitted to screening to change their attitudes, perceptions and behaviour.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000095066.

Self-reported participation and beliefs about bowel cancer screening in New South Wales, Australia

ISSUE ADDRESSED

To describe self-reported bowel cancer screening participation, beliefs and attitudes in a sample of New South Wales (NSW) adults, and to identify beliefs and demographic factors associated with self-reported bowel cancer screening participation.

METHODS

This study used data from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 2, a representative population-based telephone survey. Self-reported participation in and beliefs about bowel cancer screening were measured using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer survey of people aged 50 years and over living in NSW, Australia (n=2001). Logistic regression modelling was used to identify explanatory variables associated with bowel cancer screening participation.

RESULTS

Half of all women (54.1%, 95% CI: 50.8-57.4%) and two-thirds of men (65.7%, 95% CI: 61.5-69.9%) reported screening for bowel cancer within the previous 5 years. Believing that screening was only necessary when experiencing symptoms was more likely to be endorsed by people aged 65 years and over (25.5%, 95% CI: 22.2-28.7%) rather than younger (50-64 years; 16.7%, 95% CI: 13.8-19.7%), non-English-speaking migrants (35.4%, 95% CI: 26.7-44.1%) versus others (18.6%, 95% CI: 16.4-20.7%), and people in metropolitan (23.3%, 95% CI: 20.4-26.1%) versus non-metropolitan areas (16.4%, 95% CI: 12.8-20%). People who disagreed that screening was only necessary when experiencing symptoms were four times more likely to report screening participation (OR 3.96, 95% CI: 3.11-5.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Community education about bowel cancer screening is needed to correct misperceptions regarding screening in the absence of symptoms. Tailored strategies for older, migrant and urban communities may be beneficial. SO WHAT? Education strategies that promote the need for screening in the absence of symptoms and correct misconceptions about bowel cancer screening amongst subgroups of the NSW population may improve screening rates and decrease the burden of bowel cancer in NSW.

Behavioural and demographic predictors of adherence to three consecutive faecal occult blood test screening opportunities: a population study

Background

Social cognitive variables are often examined for their association with initial participation in colorectal cancer screening. Few studies have examined the association of these variables with adherence to multiple screening offers i.e., rescreening. This study aimed to describe patterns of participatory behaviour after three rounds of screening using faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and to determine social cognitive, demographic and background variables predictive of variations in adherence.

Methods

Participants were 1,540 men and women aged 50 to 75 living in South Australia who completed a behavioural survey measuring demographic (for example, age, gender) and social cognitive variables relevant to FIT screening (for example, perceived barriers, benefits, self-efficacy). The survey was followed by three, free FIT screening offers mailed on an annual basis from 2008 to 2010. Patterns of participation after three screening rounds were described as one of five screening behaviours; 1) consistent re-participation (adherent with all screening rounds), 2) consistent refusal (adherent with no screening rounds), 3) drop out (adherent with earlier but not later rounds), 4) intermittent re-participation (adherent with alternate rounds) and 5) delayed entry (adherent with later but not initial round(s)). Univariate (Chi Square and Analysis of Variance) and multivariate (Generalised Estimating Equations) analyses were conducted to determine variables predictive of each category of non-adherence (those that did not participate in every screening offer, groups 2, 3, 4 and 5) relative to consistent re-participation.

Results

Significant social cognitive predictors of non-adherence were; less self-efficacy (drop out and consistent refusal), greater perceived barriers (drop out) and lower levels of response efficacy (consistent refusal). Demographic predictors of non-adherence included; male gender (delayed entry), younger age (intermittent, delayed and consistent refusal), less frequent GP visits (intermittent re-participation) and 'ancillary only' private health insurance (drop out). Less satisfaction with screening at baseline predicted drop out, consistent refusal and delayed entry.

Conclusions

Different combinations of demographic and behavioural variables predicted different patterns of rescreening adherence. Rescreening interventions may benefit from a targeted approach that considers the different needs of the population subgroups. Satisfaction with past FOBT screening measured prior to the study screening offers was an important predictor of adherence.

Self-reported bowel screening rates in older Australians and the implications for public health screening programs

BACKGROUND

This paper sought to determine the status of older Australians with regard to Bowel Cancer screening practices occurring outside of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program.

METHOD

A random sample of N=25,511 urban Australians aged 50 to 74 years received a questionnaire via mail asking questions relating to bowel screening. N=8,762 (34.3%) returned a completed questionnaire.

RESULTS

Approximately 33% (N=2863) of respondents indicated they had undergone colonoscopy in the preceding five years and 21% (N=1840) had used a Faecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) in the preceding 12 months. Furthermore, 27% (N=497) of those who had completed an FOBT had also undergone colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of older Australians might be participating in bowel screening practices outside of the national program (NBCSP). Moreover, the proportion of individuals reporting use of both FOBT and endoscopic services is much higher than the positivity rate of FOBT. Large population FOBT screening programs, such as the NBCSP, that do not consider participation in screening external to the program may underestimate true population screening rates.

Decision Support and the Effectiveness of Web-based Delivery and Information Tailoring for Bowel Cancer Screening: An Exploratory Study

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in males and the second in females throughout the developed world. Population screening using fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) facilitates early detection and greater chance of survival, but participation rates are low. We developed a Web-based decision tool to provide information tailored to an individual’s decision stage for CRC screening and attitude toward screening utilizing the Preventive Health Model (PHM) and Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) as theoretical frameworks for screening behavior. We describe the practical steps employed in the tool’s design and the subsequent conduct of an exploratory study.

Objective

To design a decision tool for CRC screening and conduct an exploratory study among average-risk men and women to (1) test the impact of message type (tailored vs non-tailored) and message delivery modality (Web-based vs paper-based) on attitudes toward screening and screening uptake, and (2) investigate the acceptability of the decision tool and relevance of materials.

Methods

Participants (n = 100), recruited from a population sample of men and women aged 50-76 residing in urban Adelaide, Australia, were randomly assigned to a control group or one of 4 interventions: (1) Web-based and tailored information, (2) paper-based and tailored information, (3) Web-based and non-tailored (generic) information, or (4) paper-based and non-tailored information. Participation was augmented by snowball recruitment (n = 19). Questionnaires based on PHM variables were administered pre- and post-intervention. Participants were given the opportunity to request an FOBT. Following the intervention, participants discussed the acceptability of the tool.

Results

Full data were available for 87.4% (104/119) of participants. Post-intervention, perceived susceptibility scores for individuals receiving tailored information increased from mean 10.6 (SD 2.1) to mean 11.8 (SD 2.2). Scores on self-efficacy increased in the tailored group from mean 11.7 (SD 2.0) to mean 12.6 (SD 1.8). There were significant time x modality x message effects for social influence and salience and coherence, reflecting an increase in these scores for tailored Web-based participants only; social influence scores increased from mean 11.7 (SD 2.6) to mean 14.9 (SD 2.3), and salience and coherence scores increased from mean 16.0 (SD 2.2) to mean 17.7 (SD 2.1). There was no greater influence of modality or message type on movement toward a decision to screen or screening uptake, indicating that neither tailored messages nor a Web modality had superior effect. Overall, participants regarded tailored messages positively, but thought that the Web tool lacked “media richness.”

Conclusions

This exploratory study confirms that tailoring on PHM predictors of CRC screening has the potential to positively address attitudes toward screening. However, tailoring on these variables did not result in significantly increased screening uptake. Future research should consider other possible psychosocial influences. Mode of delivery did not affect outcomes, but as a delivery medium, the Web has economic and logistical advantages over paper.

The impact of media coverage of the Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial on English colorectal screening uptake

Objective

To assess the impact of media coverage of the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial on colorectal screening uptake in England.

Setting

In April 2010, publication of the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) Trial results generated considerable media interest in both FS and colorectal cancer (CRC) generally.

Methods

We used routinely collected data from the south of England (excluding London) to analyse return of faecal occult blood test (FOBt) kits within 28 days of the invitation (early uptake) among 60–69 year olds, before (T1, n = 31,229), around the time of (T2, n = 39,571), and one month after (T3, n = 33,430) the FS publicity.

Results

FOBt uptake over the whole period was 58.2%, with 38.4% of the kits returned within 28 days (early uptake). Across the three time periods, early uptake was 35.8% at T1, 39.4% at T2, and 39.7% at T3. Multivariate regression controlling for age, gender and socioeconomic status confirmed that uptake was higher if people received the FOBt kit around the time of the media coverage (T2: odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.13–1.20), or one month after (T3: OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.15–1.22) than before (T1). Sub-group analyses demonstrated that the impact was stronger among previous non-responders than among first-time invitees or previous responders (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Media coverage of the FS Trial appeared to have a small but positive impact on FOBt screening uptake, especially among people who had previously abstained from screening.

Responses to procedural information about colorectal cancer screening using faecal occult blood testing: the role of consideration of future consequences

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation is low despite its effectiveness in reducing CRC mortality. Identifying benefits and barriers requires consideration of specific characteristics of screening modalities. AIMS AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS: To monitor the impact of providing information about CRC screening via faecal occult blood testing (FOBt) on intentions to participate. To investigate moderation by individual differences in consideration of future consequences (CFC).

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 211 healthy adults (aged 45-59) with no experience of CRC screening were presented with eight consecutive statements about FOBt-based screening in a web survey. Participants completed measures of i) intention (after each statement), ii) CFC and iii) the importance of screening practicalities (e.g. unpleasantness of completing the test) and benefits (e.g. early detection of cancer).

RESULTS

An 8 (information)×2 (CFC) mixed ancova showed that intentions varied across the eight statements. (P<0.001): increasing after information about FOBt being completed at home (P<0.001) before subsequently decreasing after information about the requirement to collect faecal samples (P<0.001) in a plastic tub (P<0.01) on three occasions (P<0.01) with the low CFC group generally being less inclined to complete the test (P<0.01). Two between-group anovas demonstrated that the low CFC group attributed greater importance to practicalities of screening than the high CFC group while the opposite was found for the importance of benefits (both P's<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Deconstructing FOBt-based screening pointed to specific benefits and barriers which can advance research into public preferences of screening and educational materials.

Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer

Background

Previous research points to differences between predictors of intention to screen for colorectal cancer (CRC) and screening behavior, and suggests social ecological factors may influence screening behavior. The aim of this study was to compare the social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention to screen with predictors of participation.

Methods

People aged 50 to 74 years recruited from the electoral roll completed a baseline survey (n = 376) and were subsequently invited to complete an immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT).

Results

Multivariate analyses revealed five predictors of intention to screen and two predictors of participation. Perceived barriers to CRC screening and perceived benefits of CRC screening were the only predictor of both outcomes. There was little support for social ecological factors, but measurement problems may have impacted this finding.

Conclusions

This study has confirmed that the predictors of intention to screen for CRC and screening behaviour, although overlapping, are not the same. Research should focus predominantly on those factors shown to predict participation. Perceptions about the barriers to screening and benefits of screening are key predictors of participation, and provide a focus for intervention programs.