Effectiveness of tailored communication intervention in increasing colonoscopy screening rates amongst first-degree relatives of individuals with colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Communication quality predicts patients' colorectal cancer screening behavior

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the quality of patient/clinician communication as one potential factor that impacts colorectal cancer screening behavior. As part of a larger randomized controlled trial conducted between 2011 and 2016 in the setting of community and academic family medicine or internal medicine practices in Michigan, USA, patients completed a pre-encounter survey, completed their regularly scheduled visit with their primary care clinician (which was audio-recorded), completed a post-encounter survey, and allowed 6-month follow-up chart audit. We trained 10 coders to rate 216 of the audio-recorded conversations between 216 patients and their primary care physicians for 6 specific features of communication quality (using 7-point scales), including the extent to which participants enacted attention to medical content, engagement, emotional expression, relationships, face, and accommodation. At least 3 coders rated each conversation, and intraclass correlations (i.e., reliability assessment) were in the good to excellent range. We found that patient and clinician attention to face (an identity goal) was a significant predictor of colorectal cancer screening at 6 months follow up. Measuring communication in terms of attention to multiple goals reveals unexpected findings about the aspects of communication that impact colorectal cancer screening behavior. The focus of many interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening rates is on the content (i.e., task goals) of clinicians' communication (such as presenting the different options for screening), yet the content of communication was not a significant predictor of screening in the present study. Rather, clinicians' and patients' attention to identity goals predicted screening behavior, which suggests that interventions may not need to be overly complex and that simply improving the quality of attention to identity goals in clinician communication might be one of the most straightforward yet impactful ways to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake among patients.

Effects of health education on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the effects of educational intervention on the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients.

METHODS

A total of eight Chinese and English databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Medline and China Biology Medicine disc) from the time of library establishment to June 2023, for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of educational intervention on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. Two researchers independently screened and evaluated the quality of studies. RevMan 5.3 software was used to calculate the pooled effect size.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 5628 participants were chosen to include in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that health education can increase screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.16-1.65, P = 0.0002). The effect shown after short-term follow-up (≤6 months) was insignificant in terms of improving screening rate (RR = 1.46, 95% CI = 0.94-2.26, P = 0.09), but after long-term follow-up (＞6 months) the improvement was greater (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.13-1.65, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Health education is effective in increasing the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. The effect is more evident after long-term than short-term follow-up.

Patient Navigation Plus Tailored Digital Video Disc Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Low-Income and Minority Patients Who Did Not Attend a Scheduled Screening Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of people scheduled for screening colonoscopy do not complete this test and no studies have focused on minority and low-income populations. Interventions are needed to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening knowledge, reduce barriers, and provide alternative screening options. Patient navigation (PN) and tailored interventions increase CRC screening uptake, however there is limited information comparing their effectiveness or the effect of combining them.

PURPOSE

Compare the effectiveness of two interventions to increase CRC screening among minority and low-income individuals who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointment-a mailed tailored digital video disc (DVD) alone versus the mailed DVD plus telephone-based PN compared to usual care.

METHODS

Patients (n = 371) aged 45-75 years at average risk for CRC who did not attend a screening colonoscopy appointment were enrolled and were randomized to: (i) a mailed tailored DVD; (ii) the mailed DVD plus phone-based PN; or (iii) usual care. CRC screening outcomes were from electronic medical records at 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to study intervention effects.

RESULTS

Participants randomized to tailored DVD plus PN were four times more likely to complete CRC screening compared to usual care and almost two and a half times more likely than those who were sent the DVD alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining telephone-based PN with a mailed, tailored DVD increased CRC screening among low-income and minority patients who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointments and has potential for wide dissemination.

Implementing a tailored communication intervention to increase colonoscopy screening rates among first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer: Lessons learned

PURPOSE

To report the process evaluation of a tailored communication intervention for first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients in a randomized controlled trial.

METHOD

Based on the MRC process evaluation framework, the process of delivering a two-arm RCT intervention were evaluated on 3 themes: (1) implementation, (2) mechanism, and (3) contextual factors. Implementation data were collected through a logbook, online tool platform feedback, and questionnaire surveys. Subgroup analysis was conducted for implementation outcomes. The mechanism and contextual factors were analyzed by mediation and moderation analysis.

RESULTS

From March 2019 to May 2019, 188 (57%) eligible participants were recruited to participate in this study in Shenzhen, China. In the intervention group, 68 (72.3%) participants received written and verbal sessions. Relatively high satisfaction rates (77.6%-100%) were achieved. The mediating effect was found for perceived barriers (95%CI = -0.880, -0.133) and cues to action (95%CI = 0.043, 0.679). No moderators were identified. People who received the first two sessions are more likely to receive a colonoscopy, whereas the time spent on intervention did not influence the colonoscopy uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential strategies to enlarge the tailored effect were identified, including tailoring communication on the perceived barriers and cues to action and reinforcing patients' compliance in the first written and verbal sessions. To accomplish the difficult task of recruiting at-risk family members, direct approaches and adequate records on contact information of at-risk family members are suggested when the cancer cases were identified for the first time.

Screening uptake of colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in first-degree relatives of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer: A multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial (ParCoFit study)

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy screening is underused by first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer (CRC) with screening completion rates below 50%. Studies conducted in FDR referred for screening suggest that fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) was not inferior to colonoscopy in terms of diagnostic yield and tumor staging, but screening uptake of FIT has not yet been tested in this population. In this study, we investigated whether the uptake of FIT screening is superior to the uptake of colonoscopy screening in the familial-risk population, with an equivalent effect on CRC detection.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial was conducted in 12 Spanish centers between February 2016 and December 2021. Eligible individuals included asymptomatic FDR of index cases <60 years, siblings or ≥2 FDR with CRC. The primary outcome was to compare screening uptake between colonoscopy and FIT. The secondary outcome was to determine the efficacy of each strategy to detect advanced colorectal neoplasia (adenoma or serrated polyps ≥10 mm, polyps with tubulovillous architecture, high-grade dysplasia, and/or CRC). Screening-naïve FDR were randomized (1:1) to one-time colonoscopy versus annual FIT during 3 consecutive years followed by a work-up colonoscopy in the case of a positive test. Randomization was performed before signing the informed consent using computer-generated allocation algorithm based on stratified block randomization. Multivariable regression analysis was performed by intention-to-screen. On December 31, 2019, when 81% of the estimated sample size was reached, the trial was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis for futility. Study outcomes were further analyzed through 2-year follow-up. The main limitation of this study was the impossibility of collecting information on eligible individuals who declined to participate. A total of 1,790 FDR of 460 index cases were evaluated for inclusion, of whom 870 were assigned to undergo one-time colonoscopy (n = 431) or FIT (n = 439). Of them, 383 (44.0%) attended the appointment and signed the informed consent: 147/431 (34.1%) FDR received colonoscopy-based screening and 158/439 (35.9%) underwent FIT-based screening (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.82, 1.44], p = 0.564). The detection rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia was significantly higher in the colonoscopy group than in the FIT group (OR 3.64, 95% CI [1.55, 8.53], p = 0.003). Study outcomes did not change throughout follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, compared to colonoscopy, FIT screening did not improve screening uptake by individuals at high risk of CRC, resulting in less detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia. Further studies are needed to assess how screening uptake could be improved in this high-risk group, including by inclusion in population-based screening programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02567045).

Screening Behaviors and Related Factors among the First-Degree Relatives of Chinese Patients with Gastric Cancer

Objective

This study was aimed at investigating the screening behaviors of the first-degree relatives (FDRs) of Chinese patients with gastric cancer as well as the factors influencing screening behaviors.

Methods

In a cross-sectional design, 197 FDRs of patients with gastric cancer were enrolled at the Peking University Cancer Hospital. Four questionnaires were used: a demographic questionnaire, a knowledge questionnaire of risk factors and warning symptoms for gastric cancer, the Gastric Cancer Health Belief Scale, and a questionnaire screening for behavioral motivators and barriers. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors influencing screening behaviors.

Results

Among the 197 FDRs of patients with gastric cancer, 30.96% (61/197) of patients had undergone gastric cancer screening. Among those who participated in gastric cancer screening, the most common screening methods were gastroscopy and the Helicobacter pylori testing, both of which were applied in 63.93% (39/61) of participants, followed by serum tumor marker testing (55.74%, 34/61) and barium meal examination of the upper digestive tract (29.51%, 18/61). The gastric cancer risk factor knowledge score was 9.02 ​± ​3.95, and the gastric cancer warning symptom knowledge score was 4.39 ​± ​1.85. The participants' knowledge score was moderate, at 13.41 ​± ​5.16. The total health beliefs score was low, at 88.91 ​± ​12.66. Factors independently associated with the screening behaviors of FDRs included educational background, knowledge of gastric cancer risk factors, and health motivation (P ​< ​0.05).

Conclusions

The participation rate in gastric cancer screening of FDRs of patients with gastric cancer was relatively low and was affected by multiple factors. Our results highlighted the urgent need for educational campaigns and precision interventions to raise gastric cancer awareness.

Familial colonoscopic screening: how do French general practitioners deal with patients and their high-risk relatives. A qualitative study

Background

Screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce incidence and mortality. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with CRC or advanced adenoma before the age of 65 (index patients) are at increased risk of CRC; however, the guidelines for screening of FDRs by colonoscopy are poorly followed.

Objectives

The present study, conducted in the context of the COLOR3 interventional study project, aimed to explore the positioning of general practitioners (GPs) in familial CRC screening in France.

Methods

From February 2020 to April 2021, 35 semi-structured interviews with GPs of index patients and/or their FDRs were conducted by telephone. The full-data transcribed corpus was subjected to horizontal thematic analysis.

Results

Knowledge and compliance with the guidelines vary greatly between GPs. Although initiating the diagnostic process, GPs do not consider themselves as actors in the flow of information concerning familial risk. Their accompaniment of index patients in this role varies. GPs should overcome barriers to implementing colonoscopic screening for FDRs. They underline the importance of exploring family history, but they lack the time and doubt the reliability of the information given by FDRs.

Conclusion

Challenges include circumventing gaps in knowledge, adherence to guidelines and improving family history updates. The GPs interviewed suggested personalised guidelines in specialists' reports to initiate information campaigns raising awareness of familial risk, and to enhance coordination between organised screening and familial screening.

Screening recommendation adherence among first-degree relatives of individuals with colorectal cancer

A first-degree relative (FDR) with colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most important risk factors for the disease. Adherence to CRC screening recommendations can help mitigate this risk; however, adherence has historically been low. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with CRC screening. The study used data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey. CRC screening rates were compared between FDRs and their peers without a family history of CRC. Participants were considered to be adherent if they had undergone any of the following: fecal immunochemical test within the prior 1 year, sigmoidscopy or computed tomography colongraphy within 5 years, or colonoscopy within 10 years. The analysis included 11,381 participants age 50-75 at time of survey. Overall, 62% of participants were adherent to screening recommendations. Seventy-six percent of FDRs of individuals with CRC were adherent to guidelines; they were 86% more likely to be adherent than their peers. Race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic variables were all associated with adherence. Models were largely similar between FDRs of individuals with CRC and the general public. Nearly one-quarter of FDRs of individuals with CRC are not adherent to screening recommendations. Further outreach is needed for members of minority races and the Hispanic community and additional efforts are needed to increase the accessibility of CRC screening for those with more limited finances and the uninsured.

Motivational Interviewing to Improve the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Colorectal cancer screening when done early can significantly reduce mortality. However, screening compliance is still lower than expected even in countries with established screening programs. Motivational interviewing is an approach that has been explored to promote behavioral change including screening compliance. This review synthesizes the efficacy of motivational interviewing in promoting uptake of colorectal screening modalities and is the only review so far that examines motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening alone.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effects of motivational interviewing for colorectal cancer screening. PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched to identify eligible studies from inception to June 2021 and selection criteria was defined. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The DerSimonian and Laird random effects model was used in the statistical analysis for studies included in the meta-analysis.

Results

Fourteen studies from 14 randomized-controlled trials with a low to moderate risk of bias were analyzed. 8 studies in the systematic review showed that motivational interviewing is superior to a control group. Meta-analysis was conducted on 11 studies and showed that motivational interviewing is statistically significant in increasing colorectal cancer screening rates in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis. Timing of data collection of colorectal cancer screening rates did not make a significant difference to the efficacy of motivational interviewing. Studies that offered and accepted a mixture of colorectal screening modalities such as colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical tests were significantly more likely to have favorable colorectal screening outcomes. Heterogeneity in intervention was noted between studies, specifically differences in the training of interventionists, intervention delivery and comparator components.

Conclusion

Motivational interviewing is a tailored intervention demonstrating mixed evidence in improving colorectal cancer screening attendance amongst individuals. More research is needed to rigorously compare the effect of motivational interviewing alone vs. in combination with other screening promotion strategies to enhance colorectal cancer screening compliance.

Effectiveness of a tailored communication intervention on colonoscopy uptake for firstdegree relatives of colorectal cancer patients: A randomised controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the effect of a WeChat tailored communication intervention on colonoscopy uptake and health beliefs in Chinese first-degree relatives (FDRs) of colorectal cancer patients.

Methods

This study employed a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. A total of 188 eligible FDRs were recruited and randomly assigned to the tailored intervention group or control group. Health beliefs were assessed at 1 (T1) and 3 months (T2) postintervention. The colonoscopy uptake was verified by medical records at T2. Data were analyzed using binary logistic regression and generalized estimating equation models.

Results

Compared with the participants in the control group, those in the intervention group had a significant improvement in terms of colonoscopy uptake (OR = 2.752, 95% CI: 1.428–5.303, P ​< ​0.01), perceived susceptibility (T1: β ​= ​0.298, 95% CI: ​0.052–0.402, P ​< ​0.05; T2: β ​= ​0.251, 95% CI: ​0.078–0.424, P ​< ​0.001) and cues to action (T1: β ​= ​0.0.264, 95% CI: ​0.138–0.389, P ​< ​0.001; T2: β ​= ​0.327, 95% CI: ​0.195–0.459, P ​< ​0.001) and a significant reduction in perceived barriers (T1: β ​= ​−0.237, 95% CI: ​−0.360−0.115, P ​< ​0.01; T2: β ​= ​−0.196, 95% CI: ​−0.331−0.062, P ​< ​0.01).

Conclusions

This study broadens the application of tailored communication using novel channels in the context of screening in the at-risk Chinese population. The results provide insights on how to improve the intervention by modifying its components and communication channels.

Communicating risk to promote colorectal cancer screening: a multi-method study to test tailored versus targeted message strategies

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are suboptimal, partly due to poor communication about CRC risk. More effective methods are needed to educate patients, but little research has examined best practices for communicating CRC risk. This multi-method study tests whether tailoring CRC risk information increases screening intentions. Participants (N = 738) were randomized with a 2:2:1 allocation to tailored, targeted, and control message conditions. The primary outcome was intention to screen for CRC (yes/no). Additional variables include perceived message relevance, perceived susceptibility to CRC, and free-text comments evaluating the intervention. A chi-square test determined differences in the proportion of participants who intended to complete CRC screening by condition. A logistic-based path analysis explored mediation. Free-text comments were analyzed using advanced topic modeling analysis. CRC screening intentions were highest in the tailored intervention and significantly greater than control (P = 0.006). The tailored message condition significantly increased message relevance compared with control (P = 0.027) and targeted conditions (P = 0.002). The tailored condition also increased susceptibility (P < 0.001) compared with control, which mediated the relationship between the tailored condition and intention to screen (b = 0.04, SE = 0.02, 95% confidence interval = 0.02, 0.09). The qualitative data reflect similar trends. The theoretical mechanisms and practical implications of tailoring health education materials about CRC risk are discussed.

Colorectal cancer patients advocating screening to their siblings: a randomized behavioral intervention

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Siblings of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are at increased risk of developing CRC, but screening rates remain low. Through a randomized behavioral intervention, this study aimed to determine whether patients can advocate screening to their siblings using a tailored educational package.

METHODS

CRC survivors were recruited and randomized into relaying either tailored materials (intervention group) or existing national screening guidelines (control group) to their siblings. Siblings could respond to the study team if they were interested in learning about CRC screening. Study outcomes were patient advocacy rates (number of patients who had successfully contacted at least 1 eligible sibling) between groups and the proportion of eligible siblings who responded.

RESULTS

Between May 2017 and March 2021, 219 CRC patients were randomized to the intervention (n = 110) and control (n = 109) groups. Patient advocacy rates were high and did not differ significantly between groups. However, only 14.3% of eligible siblings (n = 85) responded to the study team. Siblings of patients from the intervention group were more likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0; P < .05). Moreover, after controlling for potential confounders, siblings aged ≥60 years were significantly less likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, .3; 95% confidence interval, .1-.7; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

CRC patients are willing advocates of screening, and siblings contacted by patients from the intervention group were also more likely to reach out to the study team. However, overall sibling response rates were low despite advocacy, suggesting that patient-led advocacy should at best be used as an adjunct to other, multipronged CRC screening promotion modalities.

Barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in Asia

Purpose

One of the most common cancers in Asia is colorectal cancer (CRC). Early diagnosis and timely treatment are necessary for preventing complications and advanced stages of the disease. It is important to evaluate barriers and facilitators of screening in different countries. This systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of CRC screening in Asia.

Methods

In this systematic review, for identifying barriers and facilitators of CRC screening, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus in 12 December 2020. Combination keywords such as colorectal cancer, screening, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, faecal occult blood test, barriers, facilitators and the names of each Asian country were used for searching. Full text original studies in English language were accepted in the review.

Results

In total, 36 articles were included in the review. Barriers and facilitators were evaluated. The most common reported barriers were lack of knowledge, fear of result, fear of procedure, fear of pain, lack of awareness, high cost and lack of gastrointestinal symptoms. The most frequent facilitators were having knowledge and awareness of CRC screening, perceived risk and severity, family history of cancer and physician recommendation.

Conclusion

For promoting success in CRC screening programmes, knowing what the barriers and facilitators are is necessary. Awareness and various personal, professional and social factors have been shown to be the major barriers toward CRC screening in most Asian countries.

Development and feasibility of an evidence-based and theory-driven tailored mHealth communication intervention to increase colonoscopy screening rate in first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To develop and investigate the feasibility of an evidence-based and theory-driven tailored communication to increase colonoscopy screening rates amongst first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients.

METHOD

Based on the tailoring process and identified evidence from the systematic review conducted by the research team, the tailored communication was developed from four aspects: (1) tailoring variables (e.g., demographic, behavioural, and psychosocial characteristics), (2) decision rules, (3) tailored messages and (4) delivery plan. Expert (n = 5) and layman review (n = 5) were conducted to ensure the content validity of decision rules and tailored messages. A single-blinded, family-based cluster randomised controlled trial (n = 21) tested the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.

RESULTS

A three-session mobile-based tailored intervention with clear decision rules and 27 tailored messages were developed. In the feasibility study, the recruitment rate was 34.4%. The response rate at 1-month post-intervention was 61.9%. After a voice call was added for nonresponders, the response rate at the 3-month post-intervention increased to 81%. All participants were satisfied with the intervention and agreed that the intervention helped them understand the risks and appropriate screening recommendations.

CONCLUSION

The development of a three-session mobile-based tailored intervention with an integrated tailoring decision and message system was reported in this study. Given its remote nature, the mobile-based tailored intervention may encounter challenges in family recruitment and online assessment. Suggestions on (1) study design to avoid contamination, (2) recruitment approaches and (3) strategies to promote response to online questionnaires were made for a future definitive trial.

Using social marketing for the promotion of cognitive health: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The use of social marketing strategies to induce the promotion of cognitive health has received little attention in research. The objective of this scoping review is twofold: (i) to identify the social marketing strategies that have been used in recent years to initiate and maintain health-promoting behaviour; (ii) to advance research in this area to inform policy and practice on how to best make use of these strategies to promote cognitive health.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will use the five-stage methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. Articles in English published since 2010 will be searched in electronic databases (the Cochrane Library, DoPHER, the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, PsycInfo, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus). Quantitative and qualitative study designs as well as reviews will be considered. We will include those articles that report the design, implementation, outcomes and evaluation of programmes and interventions concerning social marketing and/or health promotion and/or promotion of cognitive health. Grey literature will not be searched. Two independent reviewers will assess in detail the abstracts and full text of selected citations against the inclusion criteria. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flowchart for Scoping Reviews will be used to illustrate the process of article selection. We will use a data extraction form, present the results through narrative synthesis and discuss them in relation to the scoping review research questions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required for conducting this scoping review. The results of the review will be the first step to advance a conceptual framework, which contributes to the development of interventions targeting the promotion of cognitive health. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. They will also be disseminated to key stakeholders in the field of the promotion of cognitive health.

Addressing Cancer Screening Inequities by Promoting Cancer Prevention Knowledge, Awareness, Self-Efficacy, and Screening Uptake Among Low-Income and Illiterate Immigrant Women in France

Objective: Cancer screening rates are suboptimal for disadvantaged populations in France, yet little evidence exists on their cancer-related knowledge and screening barriers. The main objective of this study was to examine cancer-related knowledge, awareness, self-efficacy, and perceptions of screening barriers among low-income, illiterate immigrant women in France following an 8-weeks cancer educational intervention. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 164 female participants in the Ain department of France between January 2019 and March 2020. Adopting the Health Belief Model as an intervention and analytic framework, salient themes were identified using qualitative thematic analysis. Results: Increased levels of perceived susceptibility to and perceived severity of cancer contributed to higher motivation to get screened. Barriers to screening included low French proficiency, shame surrounding illiteracy, and constant worries due to precarious living conditions. Perceived benefits (e.g., valuing one's health and health-promoting behaviors), cues to action from a trusted source, and greater self-efficacy (e.g., more autonomous in healthcare-seeking) outweighed perceived barriers, including cultural barriers. Conclusions: Implications include developing audience-responsive targeted cancer screening communication strategies and educational materials to increase screening rates and reduce cancer and cancer screening inequities.

Psychological distance: a qualitative study of screening barriers among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening can reduce the incidence and mortality through early detection. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with colorectal cancer are at high risk for colorectal cancer and therefore require colonoscopy. However, despite the high risk, screening adherence among FDRs remains low and the barriers to undergoing screening among FDRs in China are not clear. We explored the reasons why FDRs refused screening.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, 28 semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted face-to-face. Participants were recruited at two hospitals (an urban tertiary hospital and a community health center) in Guangzhou, South China. We used qualitative content analysis to analyze transcripts based on audio recordings and identify major themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Three major themes emerged related to FDRs' low screening participation. First, the emotional distance between FDRs and medicine was pulled away by uncomfortable feelings approaching hospitals and misunderstanding of cancer. Second, they confirmed their health state and minimized cancer risk if they had no signs in routine health examination, no symptoms and maintained a healthy, happy life. Third, they considered screening far from their daily life from the perspective of spatial distance and priority. Therefore, screening was not necessary in their view.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals should narrow psychological distance between people and screening when promoting screening technology.

Effectiveness of motivational interviewing in enhancing cancer screening uptake amongst average-risk individuals: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although cancer is a worldwide public health problem, it can be detected early and prevented through cancer screening. Recommendations for screening methods and screening intervals are currently available for several types of cancer. However, not all average-risk individuals are motivated to undergo cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of motivational interviewing that targets average-risk individuals regarding their cancer screening intention and uptake and to provide recommendations for the content and format of motivational interviewing based on the existing evidence.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using four databases and a manual search. A combination of keywords including 'motivational interviewing', 'cancer screening', 'screening intention' and 'screening uptake' were used to identify relevant articles. Only randomised controlled trials that examined the effects of motivational interviewing amongst average-risk individuals were included in the review. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the selected articles. The findings were summarised in narrative and tabular formats.

RESULTS

Six randomised controlled trials that used motivational interviewing to enhance cancer screening uptake or intention were included in the review. The findings show that motivational interviewing that used a face-to-face and telephone-based approach or were used together with a tailored or reminder letter enhanced the participants' uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening and their intention to undergo future cervical cancer screening. Mixed results were observed in the effectiveness of single-contact motivational interviewing on colorectal cancer screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of motivational interviewing has demonstrated improvements in the uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening. However, more research is warranted in view of the inconclusive findings noted for colorectal cancer screening. Further studies with more rigorous methods are needed to identify the most effective interventions and to test the feasibility and efficiency of the use of Internet-based information communication technology to deliver motivational interviewing.

Colonoscopy Screening Behaviour and Associated Factors Amongst First-Degree Relatives of People with Colorectal Cancer in China: Testing the Health Belief Model Using a Cross-Sectional Design

Colonoscopy is the best screening choice for at-risk persons, because it offers prevention through the removal of preneoplastic lesions in addition to early detection. This study aims to report the participation rate of colonoscopy screening and examine its associated factors amongst Chinese first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer based on the health belief model (HBM). A cross-sectional study was conducted in Shenzhen, China from March to May 2019. Demographic characteristics, family history, variables derived from the HBM and colonoscopy screening behaviours were measured through online surveys as the independent variables of interest. A total of 186 online surveys were returned, with a final response rate of 57.0%. The participation rate of colonoscopy was 15.6%. Univariate analysis (independent t-test/chi-square test/Fisher test) was applied first to identify the candidate independent variables. Then, multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association between independent variables and uptake of colonoscopy. Perceived barriers and cues to action were identified as factors associated with undergoing colonoscopy. The participation rate of colonoscopy in the study population was low. Health communication to promote colonoscopy screening for the Chinese at-risk population should include components in reducing barriers to colonoscopy tests, family history information and health professional recommendations on screening. Future studies with large sample size are suggested to examine perceived susceptibility, fatalism and other characteristics considering family history (treatment and outcome of patients) and their potential impacts on cancer screening behaviours for Chinese at-risk populations due to family history.

Translation, Adaptation, and Validation of Revised Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening Instrument among First-Degree Relatives of People with Colorectal Cancer in China

Objective:

The purpose of the study was to translate and validate the psychometric properties of the Revised Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening (RCRCPS) instrument for the first-degree relatives (FDRs) of people with colorectal cancer (CRC) in China.

Methods:

The translation, adaptation, and validation guideline developed by Sousa and Rojjanasrirat was used to guide this study. All items from the Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening (CRCPS) instrument and three items from the Perceived Barriers Questionnaire were combined and further adapted for a colonoscopy test, resulting in RCRCPS. The resultant RCRCPS was translated from English to Chinese through forward- and backward-translation methods, and a panel review was conducted to examine its content validity. The RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) was then tested with a convenience sample of 197 Chinese FDRs of patients with CRC. Validity was tested through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and discriminative validity, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α and test–retest reliability.

Results:

The content validity index (CVI) of the RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) was satisfactory (item CVI = 0.80–1 and scale CVI = 0.92). The results demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.74–0.87) and test–retest reliability in a 4-week interval (intraclass coefficient = 0.53–0.84). CFA revealed that the RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) conformed to the four-factor model suggested by the original version (Chi-square/degree of freedom = 1.326, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.041, comparative fit index = 0.904, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.896, and standardized root mean square residual = 0.684).

Conclusions:

The 38-item simplified Chinese version of RCRCPS demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. Healthcare professionals may use this instrument in the development and evaluation of interventions to promote colonoscopy screening among people at an increased risk of developing CRC.