Promoting colorectal cancer screening through group education in community-based settings

Leveraging Patient Education to Amplify Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States: Strategies and Implications

Despite several available screening modalities, colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer deaths, especially among populations with lower screening rates. Barriers to screening include cost, access, awareness, and education disparities, with interventions such as patient education programs and mailed screening kits showing promise in increasing participation rates. The current review elucidates the correlation between patient awareness/knowledge and screening rates in the United States, highlighting the pivotal role of education in mitigating these deficiencies. Different educational models, including online resources, mailed information, community programs, direct provider-based interventions, and narratives, are explored in terms of their effectiveness and limitations. We also offer a blueprint for primary care providers (PCPs) that highlights the importance of tailored education, barrier identification, and utilization of available resources to enhance CRC screening uptake. Large-scale adoption of educational strategies has the potential to significantly increase CRC screening rates and consequently reduce mortality associated with this preventable malignancy.

Interventions to Improve Endoscopic Screening Adherence of Cancer in High-Risk Populations: A Scoping Review

Background

Colorectal, and gastric cancers have the second, and fourth mortality rates worldwide, respectively. Endoscopic screening is a crucial diagnostic tool for colorectal, and gastric cancers. Effective interventions can improve adherence to endoscopic screening in high-risk populations, which is important for cancer prevention and mortality reduction. This study aimed to identify interventions that could improve adherence to endoscopic screening for cancer in high-risk populations.

Methods

Combination keywords including colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, screening adherence, and interventions were used to search for articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE Complete. The review methodology was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR).

Results

A total of 12 articles were included in this review: 9 randomized controlled trials(RCT) and 3 quasi-experimental studies(QEDs). Among the extracted studies, 11 were about colorectal cancer, and 1 was about gastric cancer. Most studies used lecture-based or Information Technology-based health education interventions. Narrative interventions have proven to be novel and effective approaches for promoting adherence to endoscopic screening. Health education interventions included cancer epidemiology, cancer risk factors, warning symptoms, and screening methods.

Conclusion

All interventions involved were effective in increasing individual knowledge of cancer-related endoscopic screening, willingness to undergo screening, and screening behaviors. These findings provide a reference for designing endoscopy-related cancer screening interventions.

Adapting Community Educational Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing the Feasibility and Efficacy of a Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention by Mode of Delivery

Few eligible patients receive lung cancer screening. We developed the Lung AIR (awareness, information, and resources) intervention to increase community education regarding lung cancer screening. The intervention was designed as an in-person group intervention; however, the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated adapting the mode of delivery. In this study we examined intervention feasibility and efficacy overall and by mode of delivery (in-person group vs. one-on-one phone) to understand the impact of adapting community outreach and engagement strategies. Feasibility was examined through participant demographics. Efficacy was measured through pre/post knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about lung cancer screening, and intention to complete screening. We reached N = 292 participants. Forty percent had a household income below $35,000, 58% had a high school degree or less, 40% were Hispanic, 57% were Black, and 84% reported current or past smoking. One-on-one phone sessions reached participants who were older, had lower incomes, more current smoking, smoked for more years, more cigarettes per day, lower pre-intervention lung cancer screening knowledge, and higher pre-intervention fear and worry. Overall pre/post test scores show significant increases in knowledge, salience, and coherence, and reduced fear and worry. Participants in the one-on-one phone sessions had significantly higher increases in salience and coherence and intention to complete screening compared to participants in the in-person group sessions. The Lung AIR intervention is a feasible and effective community-based educational intervention for lung cancer screening. Findings point to differences in reach and efficacy of the community-based intervention by mode of delivery.

Barriers and facilitators to participate in the colorectal cancer screening programme in Flanders (Belgium): a focus group study

OBJECTIVE

In Flanders (Belgium), a population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme offers a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) biennially to Flemish citizens aged 50-74 years. A FIT uptake of only 51,5% in 2018 is significantly lower among men, lower income groups and among people with other than the Belgian nationality.The objective of this study was to identify attitudes, barriers and facilitators to participate in the Flemish CRC screening programme.

METHODS

Qualitative study using focus group discussions (FGDs) with non-participants in the Flemish CRC screening programme. Four FGDs were held with non-migrant Flemish population groups, and four were held with Turkish migrants (41 participants).

RESULTS

Feeling healthy, fear of cancer and embarrassment to talk about CRC screening emerged as common barriers in all FGDs. Having other priorities (non-migrant group) and a lack of understanding mainly due to a language barrier (Turkish migrants) differed between the two groups. Providing face-to-face information, information in group and GP recommendation were perceived as important facilitators to CRC screening in both groups. More publicity and making CRC screening more of a routine (non-migrant group) and offering translated information (Turkish migrants) were the suggested facilitators that differed between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Several common and some group-specific barriers and facilitators appeared to play a role in the decision to participate in the CRC screening programme. In order to improve informed decision making and participation in the CRC screening programme in Flanders, the options of more GP involvement, targeted information events, and adapted reminder letters are currently being explored.

Cancer Awareness and Stigma in Rural Assam India: Baseline Survey of the Detect Early and Save Her/Him (DESH) Program

BACKGROUND

India has an estimated incidence of more than one million cancers annually. Breast, oral, and cervical cancers account for over one-third of newly diagnosed cases. With the introduction of pilot cancer screening programs in India, little is known about current sociocultural barriers that may hinder acceptance of screening and treatment. We sought to identify knowledge gaps, misconceptions, and stigmas surrounding cancer diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A baseline survey was conducted in Assam, India, as part of the Detect Early and Save Her/Him program, a mobile screening program for breast, oral, and cervical cancer. Data were collected on participants' cancer knowledge, and attitudes towards screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 923 residents who participated, a large majority (92.9%; n = 858) were neither aware of cancer screening availability nor had prior screening. Low-medium awareness was demonstrated regarding the carcinogenic effects of betel nuts (n = 433, 47%). Only one-third of participants recognized oral ulcers and dysphagia as cancer symptoms. Approximately 10% of respondents had misconceptions about cancer etiologies, and 42-57% endorsed statements reflecting a negative stigma towards cancer, including its long-term detrimental effects on personal, occupational, and familial life. However, the majority (68-96%) agreed with statements endorsing positive community support and medical care for cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies actionable targets for intervention in cancer education and awareness within a large rural Indian population. Education to address preventable causes of cancer and to correct misconceptions and stigma is a critical component in ensuring the successful implementation of cancer screening programs.

Creating a Workplace Culture of Preventive Health: Process and Outcomes of the Colon Cancer-Free Zone at Virginia Cooperative Extension

Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death in the USA, yet is highly preventable and detectable at an early stage through screening. Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) implemented a worksite colon cancer awareness program to increase colorectal cancer screening rates and preventive lifestyle behaviors among its employees. The Colon Cancer-Free Zone program is designed using best practice principles of worksite health programs and includes information sessions covering the topics of colorectal cancer, screening guidelines, insurance coverage, and preventive lifestyle behaviors. It is conducted in a campaign format that includes a strategic communication strategy targeting relevant screening barriers and facilitators, peer champions, and incentives. The program was implemented with VCE employees statewide utilizing a web-based system for the information sessions, and resulted in broad participation, a significant increase in screening self-efficacy (4.15 ± 0.64 vs 3.81 ± 0.76, ρ = 0.006), changes in diet and physical activity (50% and 40% of participants, respectively), and a 20.6% increase in the employee colorectal cancer screening rate. A Colon Cancer-Free Zone toolkit was developed for use by Extension Agents to implement the program at worksites in their service communities.

Cancer Knowledge Among Mexican Immigrant Farmworkers in North Carolina

Latino farmworkers are exposed to a number of carcinogens in the workplace. Cancer survival rates for Latinos are below average. This paper describes Mexican immigrant farmworkers' knowledge of colorectal, breast, and testicular cancer, and compares farmworkers' cancer knowledge to that of other Mexican immigrants. Survey interviews for this study were conducted with 100 farmworkers and 100 non-farmworkers in 2015 in North Carolina as part of an ongoing community-based participatory research project. We found low to moderate levels of knowledge about colorectal, breast, and testicular cancer among farmworkers. Compared to non-farmworkers, farmworkers had similar levels of knowledge about breast and testicular cancer, but slightly lower knowledge about colorectal cancer (p = 0.0087). Few studies have used quantitative methods to assess farmworkers' knowledge of specific types of cancer. Our results demonstrate a need for increased dissemination of existing cancer education programs and further research to develop additional educational tools.

Decision-making and socioeconomic disparities in colonoscopy screening in African Americans

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status (SES) disparities in colorectal cancer screening are persistent. Lower education and income are both associated with lower screening rates. Both cognitive (e.g., perceived barriers) and affective (e.g., disgust, fear) decision-making constructs are known determinants of colorectal cancer screening behavior. This study tests the hypotheses that SES may be related to decision-making constructs and that this SES-decision-making construct relation may contribute to explaining the SES-screening behavior disparity.

METHOD

Surveys assessing perceived benefits and barriers to screening, self-efficacy, positive and negative affective associations with colonoscopy, fear of colonoscopy, colorectal cancer knowledge, past screening behavior, and demographics including education and income were completed by 2,015 African American participants ages 50 and older. Both univariable and multivariable relations of SES to decision-making constructs were examined, as were univariable and multivariable models of the indirect effect of SES on screening via decision-making constructs.

RESULTS

Socioeconomic status was related to both screening compliance and the decision-making constructs. Bootstrap modeling of the indirect effect showed that the total effect of the SES-screening behavior relation included an indirect effect via social cognitive decision-making constructs.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that cognitive and affective decision-making constructs account for at least some of the SES disparities in colorectal cancer screening behavior. As such, more research is needed to explore the intra individual-level influences of disparities in colorectal cancer screening. In addition, work is needed to develop effective intervention approaches to address the relation of SES to decision-making constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record

Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Role of Psychological, Social and Background Factors in Decision-making Process

Since ColoRectal Cancer (CRC) remains the third cause of cancer death in the world, a better understanding of the reasons underlying poor adherence to and delay in undergoing CRC screening programs is important. CRC screening decision-making process can be conceptualized as the relationship between intention and behavior and needs to be investigated including the impact on patients' decision of a broad range of psychological factors and personal predisposition as fear of a positive screening test, poor understanding of the procedure, psychological distress, anxiety, anticipation of pain, feelings of embarrassment and vulnerability. Also socioeconomic, ethnic and sociological influences, and organizational barriers have been identified as factors influencing CRC screening adherence. Decision-making process can finally be influenced by the healthcare background in which the intervention is promoted and screening programs are carried out. However, there is still a gap on the scientific knowledge about the influences of diverse elements on screening adherence and this deserves further investigations in order to carry out more focused and effective prevention programs.

Standardized cancer incidence disparities in Upper Manhattan New York City neighborhoods: the role of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and known risk factors

We examined the effects of race/ethnicity and neighborhood, a proxy of socioeconomic status, on cancer incidence in New York City neighborhoods: East Harlem (EH), Central Harlem (CH), and Upper East Side (UES). In this ecological study, Community Health Survey data (2002-2006) and New York State Cancer Registry incidence data (2007-2011) were stratified by sex, age, race/ethnicity, and neighborhood. Logistic regression models were fitted to each cancer incidence rate with race/ethnicity, neighborhood, and Community Health Survey-derived risk factors as predictor variables. Neighborhood was significantly associated with all cancers and 14 out of 25 major cancers. EH and CH residence conferred a higher risk of all cancers compared with UES (OR=1.34, 95% CI 1.07-1.68; and OR=1.39, 95% CI 1.12-1.72, respectively). The prevalence of diabetes and tobacco smoking were the largest contributors toward high cancer rates. Despite juxtaposition and similar proximity to medical centers, cancer incidence disparities persist among EH, CH, and UES neighborhoods. Targeted, neighborhood-specific outreach may aid in reducing cancer incidence rates.

Results from an Evaluation of the Georgia Colorectal Cancer Control Program's Community Education and Outreach Events, 2013

Although public health practitioners commonly use community education and outreach events to promote cancer screening, the effectiveness of this strategy remains unclear. This study evaluated 23 outreach events, conducted as part of the Georgia Colorectal Cancer Control Program. Of the estimated 1778 individuals who attended these events, those ages 50-75 were eligible to participate in a telephone survey 3 months after attending an event. Surveys measured colorectal cancer (CRC) risk status, CRC screening history at the time of the event, seeking or obtaining CRC screening at 3-month follow-up, and participants' knowledge of their CRC screening status. Of the 335 individuals contacted for this evaluation, 185 completed the survey. Eighty participants (43.2 %) were at elevated risk for CRC and 99 participants (53.5 %) were at average risk. Of the 99 average-risk participants, the majority (n = 69) were not due for CRC screening at the time they attended an event because they had previously received screening within the recommended time intervals. Thirty average-risk participants were due for CRC screening, either because they had never been screened before (n = 19) or because they were due for rescreening (n = 11). Approximately half of these 30 participants who were due for screening either sought (n = 6, 20.0 %) or obtained screening (n = 8, 26.7 %) 3 months following the event. Community education and outreach events may play an important role in motivating participants to seek or obtain CRC screening, but unless priority audiences are identified and recruited, events may attract people who are already compliant with CRC screening.

Impact of non-clinical community-based promotional campaigns on bowel cancer screening engagement: An integrative literature review

OBJECTIVE

This paper reviewed the relationship between non-clinical, client-oriented promotional campaigns to raise bowel cancer awareness and screening engagement.

METHOD

An integrative literature review using predefined search terms was conducted to summarise the accumulated knowledge. Data was analysed by coding and categorising, then synthesized through development of themes.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 116 studies met inclusion criteria. Promotional campaigns had varying impact on screening uptake for bowel cancer. Mass media was found to moderately increase screening, predominately amongst "worried well". Small media used in conjunction with other promotional activities, thus its effect on screening behaviours was unclear. One-on-one education was less effective and less feasible than group education in increasing intention to screen. Financial support was ineffective in increasing screening rates when compared to other promotional activities. Screening engagement increased because of special events and celebrity endorsement.

CONCLUSION

Non-clinical promotional campaigns did impact uptake of bowel cancer screening engagement. However, little is evident on the effect of single types of promotion and most research is based on clinician-directed campaigns.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Cancer awareness and screening promotions should be implemented at community and clinical level to maximize effectiveness. Such an approach will ensure promotional activities are targeting consumers, thus strengthening screening engagement.

Narrative message targets within the decision-making process to undergo screening colonoscopy among Latinos: a qualitative study

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a preventable yet leading cause of cancer mortality among Latinos in the USA. Cultural targeting and narrative messaging are two strategies to increase the low screening colonoscopy rates among Latinos. This study identifies key messages for educational interventions aiming to increase screening colonoscopy used among Latinos and proposes a model to understand the relationship between factors involved in colonoscopy decision-making. Individual in-depth interviews were conducted with 12 Latino participants primarily of Puerto Rican descent on the topics of CRC knowledge, barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy use, and the use of narrative in colorectal health messaging. Knowledge about colorectal anatomy and the anesthesia component of colonoscopy procedure is low. Fear of procedure-related pain and fear of treatment-related burden following a cancer diagnosis are significant barriers to colonoscopy. Fear of disease-related suffering and death following a cancer diagnosis and fear of regret are strong facilitators and can be augmented by cancer narratives. Storytelling is commonly used in Latino culture and is an acceptable method to educate the Latino community about CRC screening via colonoscopy. Machismo is a unique barrier to colonoscopy for Latino men via homophobia and reluctance to seek healthcare. A preliminary model to understand factors in colonoscopy decision-making among Latinos is presented. Counseling practices and educational interventions that use culturally targeted narrative health messaging to mediate fears and increase colonoscopy knowledge may increase screening colonoscopy use among Latinos.

Evaluation of the walk-through inflatable colon as a colorectal cancer education tool: results from a pre and post research design

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a disease that can be prevented through early detection. Through the use of effective educational tools, individuals can become better informed about CRC and understand the importance of screening and early detection. The walk through Inflatable Colon is an innovative educational resource developed to engage and educate communities on CRC and the importance of receiving screening at the appropriate ages.

METHODS

The Inflatable Colon Assessment Survey (ICAS) assessed knowledge and behavioral intentions to obtain screening and promote CRC awareness. New Mexico State University faculty, staff, and students completed a consent form, took the pre-ICAS, toured the Inflatable Colon, and completed the post-ICAS. The majority of participants (92%) were young adults, mostly college students, under the age of 30 yrs.

RESULTS

Overall, participants demonstrated increases in CRC knowledge and awareness after touring the inflatable colon (p-values < 0.001). Interestingly, both males and Hispanics had lower CRC awareness at pre-test, but exhibited maximum awareness gains equal to that of females and non Hispanic Whites after touring the IC. Behavioral intentions to obtain CRC screening in the future and to promote CRC awareness also increased (p-value < 0.001). Gender differences in behavioral intentions to act as advocators for CRC education were found (p < 0.05), with females being more likely to educate others about CRC than males.

CONCLUSION

Educational efforts conducted in early adulthood may serve to promote healthier lifestyles (e.g., physical activity, healthy nutrition, screening). These educated young adults may also serve to disseminate CRC information to high-risk friends and relatives. The walk through Inflatable Colon can increase CRC knowledge and intentions to get screened among a young and diverse population.