No association between colorectal cancer worry and screening uptake in Appalachian Ohio

Anticipatory anxiety and participation in cancer screening. A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesize current evidence on the association between anticipatory anxiety, defined as apprehension-specific negative affect that may be experienced when exposed to potential threat or uncertainty, and cancer screening to better inform strategies to maximize participation rates.

METHODS

Searches related to cancer screening and anxiety were conducted in seven electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL), with potentially eligible papers screened in Covidence. Data extraction was conducted independently by multiple authors. Barriers to cancer screening for any type of cancer and relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and intention were categorized and compared according to the form and target of anxiety and cancer types.

RESULTS

A total of 74 articles (nparticipants  = 119,990) were included, reporting 103 relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and 13 instances where anticipatory anxiety was reported as a barrier to screening. Anticipatory anxiety related to a possible cancer diagnosis was often associated with increased screening, while general anxiety showed no consistent relationship. Negative relationships were often found between anxiety about the screening procedure and cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Anticipatory anxiety about a cancer diagnosis may promote screening participation, whereas a fear of the screening procedure could be a barrier. Public health messaging and primary prevention practitioners should acknowledge the appropriate risk of cancer, while engendering screening confidence and highlighting the safety and comfort of screening tests.

Differences Related to Cancer Screening by Minority and Rural/Urban Status in the Deep South: Population-based Survey Results

Objective: Cancer mortality in the U.S. Deep South exceeds national levels. A cross-sectional survey was undertaken across Alabama to discern cancer beliefs and screening practices, and compare data from racial/ethnic minority versus majority and rural versus urban respondents. Methods: Using population-based methods, we approached 5,633 Alabamians (ages 50-80) to complete a 58-item survey (administered in-person, via telephone, or the web). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize findings; two-tailed, chi-square and t-tests (α<0.05) were used to compare minority-majority and rural-urban subgroups. Results: The response rate was 15.2%; respondents identified as minority (n=356) or majority (n=486), and rural (n=671) or urban (n=183). Mean (SD) age was 63.7 (10.2) and >90% indicated stable housing, and healthcare coverage and access. Rural and minority versus urban and majority respondents were significantly more likely to have lower education, employment, and income, respectively. Most respondents equated cancer as a "death sentence" and were unable to identify the age at which cancer screening should begin. Few rural-urban subgroup differences were noted, though significant differences were observed between minority versus majority subgroups for mammography (36.7% versus 49.6%, p<.001) and colorectal cancer screening (34.5% vs. 47.9%, p<0.001). Furthermore, while minorities were significantly more likely to report ever having a colonoscopy (82.1% versus 76.1%, p=0.041) and to have received fecal occult blood testing within the past year (17.2% versus 12.2%, p=0.046), routine adherence to screening was <20% across all subgroups. Discussion: Cancer early detection education is needed across Alabama to improve cancer screening, and particularly needed among racial/ethnic minorities to raise cancer awareness.

Cancer worry frequency vs. intensity and self-reported colorectal cancer screening uptake: A population-based study

Objectives

Many studies of cancer worry use items measuring frequency or intensity. Little is known about how each of these relate to cancer screening uptake. This study compared the association between worry frequency vs. intensity and colorectal cancer screening intention/uptake.

Methods

Across four surveys (2014–2016), we collected data from 2878 screening-eligible men and women (aged 60–70) in England. Measures included single-items assessing cancer worry frequency and intensity, and a derived combination of both. We also assessed self-reported past faecal occult blood testing uptake (ever vs. never), intention to participate when next invited (yes vs. no), and demographics. Using logistic regression, we compared a model containing sociodemographic characteristics (Model 1), with four models adding cancer worry frequency (Model 2), intensity (Model 3), both (Model 4), or the combined measure (Model 5).

Results

A model with cancer worry intensity and demographics (Model 3) explained significantly more variance in uptake and intention (R 2 = 0.068 and 0.062, respectively) than demographics alone (Model 1: R 2 = 0.058 and 0.042; p  < 0.001), or a model with demographics and cancer worry frequency (Model 2: R 2 = 0.059 and 0.052; p  < 0.001). The model was also equally as effective as models including both the frequency and intensity items (Model 4: R 2 = 0.070 n.s. and 0.062 n.s.), or using the derived combination of both (Model 5: R 2 = 0.063 n.s. and 0.053 n.s.).

Conclusion

A single item measure of cancer worry intensity appeared to be most parsimonious for explaining variance in colorectal cancer screening intention and uptake.

Understanding Cancer Worry Among Patients in a Community Clinic-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Intervention Study

BACKGROUND

To reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) screening disparities, it is important to understand correlates of different types of cancer worry among ethnically diverse individuals.

OBJECTIVES

The current study examined the prevalence of three types of cancer worry (i.e., general cancer worry, CRC-specific worry, and worry about CRC test results) as well as sociodemographic and health-related predictors for each type of cancer worry.

METHODS

Participants were aged 50-75, at average CRC risk, nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines, and enrolled in a randomized controlled trial to increase CRC screening. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire assessing sociodemographics, health beliefs, healthcare experiences, and three cancer worry measures. Associations between study variables were examined with separate univariate and multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Responses from a total of 416 participants were used. Of these, 47% reported experiencing moderate-to-high levels of general cancer worry. Predictors of general cancer worry were salience and coherence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 1.3]), perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3), and social influence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 0.1]). Fewer (23%) reported moderate-to-high levels of CRC-specific worry or CRC test worry (35%). Predictors of CRC worry were perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.4, 95% CI [1.3, 1.6]) and social influence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 1.2]); predictors of CRC test result worry were perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3) and marital status (aOR = 2.0, 95% CI [1.1, 3.7] for married/partnered vs. single and aOR = 2.3, 95% CI [1.3, 4.1] for divorced/widowed vs. single).

DISCUSSION

Perceived susceptibility consistently predicted the three types of cancer worry, whereas other predictors varied between cancer worry types and in magnitude of association. The three types of cancer worry were generally predicted by health beliefs, suggesting potential malleability. Future research should include multiple measures of cancer worry and clear definitions of how cancer worry is measured.

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.

Colon Cancer Worry in Appalachia

Appalachia has a higher incidence of and mortality from colon cancer (CC) than other regions of the United States; thus, it is important to know the potential impact of elevated risk on cancer worry. Guided by the Self-regulation model, we investigated the association of demographic, cultural (e.g., fatalism, religious commitment), and psychological factors (e.g., perceived risk, general mood) with CC worry among a sample of Appalachian women. A mixed method design was utilized. Appalachian women completed surveys in the quantitative section (n = 134) and semi-structured interviews in the qualitative section (n = 24). Logistic regression was employed to calculate odds ratios (OR) for quantitative data, and immersion/crystallization was utilized to analyze qualitative data. In the quantitative section, 45% of the participants expressed some degree of CC worry. CC worry was associated with higher than high school education (OR 3.63), absolute perceived risk for CC (OR 5.82), high anxiety (OR 4.68), and awareness of easy access (OR 3.98) or difficult access (OR 3.18) to health care specialists as compared to not being aware of the access. there was no association between CC worry and adherence to CC screening guidelines. The qualitative section revealed fear, disengagement, depression, shock, and worry. Additionally, embarrassment, discomfort, and worry were reported with regard to CC screening. Fears included having to wear a colostomy bag and being a burden on family. CC worry was common in Appalachians and associated with higher perceptions of risk for CC and general anxiety, but not with adherence to screening guidelines. The mixed method design allowed for enhanced understanding of CC-related feelings, especially CC worry, including social/contextual fears.

Anxiety, locus of control and sociodemographic factors associated with adherence to an annual clinical skin monitoring: a cross-sectional survey among 1000 high-risk French patients involved in a pilot-targeted screening programme for melanoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess whether adherence to annual clinical skin monitoring is dependent on patient sociodemographic characteristics or personality traits.

DESIGN

The study was a questionnaire survey.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were collected between February and April 2013 in a sample of 1000 patients at high risk of melanoma who participated in a pilot-targeted screening programme in western France.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Sociodemographic data, overall anxiety level (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaire), locus of control (Multidimensional Health Locus of Control scale) and levels of anxiety specifically associated with screening and melanoma were collected. Actual participation in the skin monitoring examination was reported by 78 general practitioner investigators.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software. Factors associated with non-adherence were identified by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 687 responses (526 adherent patients and 161 non-adherent patients). Non-adherence was higher in younger patients and in men (OR=0.63 (0.41-0.99)). Viewing health status as dependent on external persons (OR=0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97) or determined by chance (OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98) and overall anxiety (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 0.99) were also factors associated with non-adherence. In contrast, there was no link between anxiety specifically associated with the screening performed or melanoma and patient adherence to monitoring. Adherence was higher in married patients (OR=1.68 95% CI 1.08 to 2.60).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that sociodemographic and psychological characteristics should be considered when including patients at elevated risk of melanoma in a targeted screening programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01610531; Post-results.

Cancer fear: facilitator and deterrent to participation in colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Cancer fear has been associated with higher and lower screening uptake across different studies, possibly because different aspects of cancer fear have different effects on intentions versus behavior. The present study examined associations of three aspects of cancer fear with intention and uptake of endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A subsample of UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) Trial participants received a baseline questionnaire that included three cancer fear items from a standard measure asking if: (i) cancer was feared more than other diseases, (ii) cancer worry was experienced frequently, and (iii) thoughts about cancer caused discomfort. Screening intention was assessed by asking participants whether, if invited, they would accept an invitation for FS screening. Positive responders were randomized to be invited or not in a 1:2 ratio. The behavioral outcome was clinic-recorded uptake. Control variables were age, gender, ethnicity, education, and marital status.

RESULTS

The questionnaire return rate was 60% (7,971/13,351). The majority (82%) intended to attend screening; 1,920 were randomized to receive an invitation, and 71% attended. Fearing cancer more than other diseases (OR = 2.32, P < 0.01) and worrying a lot about cancer (OR = 2.34, P < 0.01) increased intentions to attend screening, but not uptake. Finding thoughts about cancer uncomfortable did not influence intention, but predicted lower uptake (OR = 0.72, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Different aspects of cancer fear have different effects on the decision and action processes leading to screening participation.

IMPACT

Knowledge of the different behavioral effects of cancer fear may aid the design of effective public health messages.

Do recent epidemiologic observations impact who and how we should screen for CRC?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended to begin at age 50 for those patients with no significant family history of CRC. However, even within this group of average-risk patients, there is data to suggest that there may be variation in CRC risk. These observations suggest that perhaps CRC screening should be tailored to target those patients at higher risk for earlier or more invasive screening as compared to those individuals at lower risk. The strategy of how to identify those higher-risk patients may not be straightforward. One method might be to use single risk factors such as smoking or elevated BMI as has been suggested in the recent American College of Gastroenterology CRC screening guidelines. Another paradigm involves the use of models which incorporate several risk factors to stratify patients by risk. This article will highlight recent large studies that examine recognized CRC risk factors as well as review recently developed CRC risk models. There will also be a discussion of the application of these factors and models in an effort to make CRC screening more efficient.