Self-Reported Reasons for Inconsistent Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening Using FIT in Flanders, Belgium

Background: In Flanders, the uptake in the population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program (using fecal immunochemical test, FIT) is suboptimal (~50%). This study explored the reasons for inconsistent participation in FIT screening among irregular participants in Flanders. Methods: An online survey with both open questions and fixed statements was sent to irregular participants (2016–2018) in the Flemish CRC screening program. A reminder email followed eight weeks after the first email. Data analysis used both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Post-stratification weights based on gender, age group, and the first two digits of the postcode were employed to reduce non-response bias. Results: In total, 5328 out of 19,592 irregular participants responded to the survey. While the main reasons not to participate were related to ‘postponing participation’ and ‘having other priorities’, the main reasons to participate were related to the importance of (preventive) health checks. The role of general practitioners (GPs) in promoting CRC screening also emerged as an important theme among the respondents’ answers (based on fixed statements). Conclusions: The study reported the main reasons for inconsistent participation in FIT screening for CRC in Flanders. The findings are helpful in guiding tailored interventions to increase FIT screening uptake in the region.

General practice-based cancer research publications: a bibliometric analysis 2013-2019

BACKGROUND

General practice plays a critical role in the prevention, diagnosis, management, and survivorship care of patients with cancer. Mapping research outputs over time provides valuable insights into the evolving role of general practice in cancer care.

AIM

To describe and compare the distribution of cancer in general practice research publications by country, cancer type, area of the cancer continuum, author sex, and journal impact factor.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A bibliometric analysis using a systematic approach to identify publications.

METHOD

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for studies published between 2013 and 2019, which reported on cancer in general practice. Included studies were mapped to the cancer continuum framework. Descriptive statistics were used to present data from the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 2798 publications were included from 714 journals, spanning 79 countries. The publication rate remained stable over this period. Overall, the US produced the most publications (n = 886, 31.7%), although, per general population capita, Denmark produced nearly 10 times more publications than the US (20.0 publications per million compared with 2.7 publications per million). Research across the cancer continuum varied by country, but, overall, most studies focused on cancer screening, diagnosis, and survivorship. More than half of included studies used observational study designs (n = 1523, 54.4%). Females made up 66.5% (n = 1304) of first authors, but only 47.0% (n = 927) of last authors.

CONCLUSION

Cancer in general practice is a stable field where research is predominantly observational. There is geographical variation in the focus of cancer in general practice research, which may reflect different priorities and levels of investment between countries. Overall, these results support future consideration of how to improve under-represented research areas and the design, conduct, and translation of interventional research.

The SMARTscreen Trial: a randomised controlled trial investigating the efficacy of a GP-endorsed narrative SMS to increase participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND

Increasing participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is the most efficient and cost-effective way of reducing mortality associated with colorectal cancer by detecting and treating early-stage disease. Currently, only 44% of Australians aged 50-74 years complete the NBCSP. This efficacy trial aims to test whether this SMS intervention is an effective method for increasing participation in the NBCSP. Furthermore, a process evaluation will explore the barriers and facilitators to sending the SMS from general practice.

METHODS

We will recruit 20 general practices in the western region of Victoria, Australia to participate in a cluster randomised controlled trial. General practices will be randomly allocated with a 1:1 ratio to either a control or intervention group. Established general practice software will be used to identify patients aged 50 to 60 years old who are due to receive a NBCSP kit in the next month. The SMS intervention includes GP endorsement and links to narrative messages about the benefits of and instructions on how to complete the NBCSP kit. It will be sent from intervention general practices to eligible patients prior to receiving the NBCSP kit. We require 1400 eligible patients to provide 80% power with a two-sided 5% significance level to detect a 10% increase in CRC screening participation in the intervention group compared to the control group. Our primary outcome is the difference in the proportion of eligible patients who completed a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) between the intervention and control group for up to 12 months after the SMS was sent, as recorded in their electronic medical record (EMR). A process evaluation using interview data collected from general practice staff (GP, practice managers, nurses) and patients will explore the feasibility and acceptability of sending and receiving a SMS to prompt completing a NBCSP kit.

DISCUSSION

This efficacy trial will provide initial trial evidence of the utility of an SMS narrative intervention to increase participation in the NBCSP. The results will inform decisions about the need for and design of a larger, multi-state trial of this SMS intervention to determine its cost-effectiveness and future implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620001020976 . Registered on 17 October 2020.

"I'm not doing that." An in-depth examination of nonparticipation in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs

Despite a clear association between the early detection of bowel cancer and increased survival, participation in mail-out screening programs is poor. Several key barriers to participation have been identified, yet research has failed to examine the specific cognitions, actions, and individual contexts from which barriers emerge. The purpose of the current study was to gain a detailed understanding of the actual experience of kit receipt from the perspective of nonparticipants including their opinion on interventions that may be effective in promoting participation. Demographic differences in reasons for nonparticipation are also examined. Opt-out data from a national program was analyzed to detect demographic differences in reasons for nonparticipation. Qualitative interviews were conducted in a sample of "at risk" nonparticipants. Thematic analysis was conducted using an inductive phenomenological approach. Older, higher SES, male and previously screened participants were more likely to provide a medical reason for opting out of participation. Four key themes emerged from interview data. The first reflected intention; whereby participants were either intenders (i.e., they planned to participate) or refusers. Subsequent themes reflected practicalities, emotional reactions, and necessity. Differences between intenders and refusers within these themes as well as opinions regarding interventions were identified. Interventions involving interactions with health professionals, autonomous decision making, and those which emphasize the positive outcomes of screening may encourage refusers to participate in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs. Messages that reinforce the importance of screening or provide a practical reminder may be more useful for intenders.

The influence of marital status and partner concordance on participation in colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening program using a fecal immunochemical test aims to reduce morbidity and mortality through early detection. Although screening participation is free-of-charge, almost 40% of the invited individuals choose not to participate. To bring new insight into how non-participation can be identified and targeted, we examined the association between marital status and screening participation; with a focus on partner concordance in participation and sex differences.

METHODS

This nationwide cross-sectional study included all Danish citizens aged 50-74 years, who were invited to colorectal cancer screening between 2014 and 2017. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratio (OR) of participation while adjusting for sociodemographic variables.

RESULTS

A total of 1 909 662 individuals were included in the analysis of which 62.7% participated in the screening program. Participation was highest among women. Stratified by marital status, screening participation was markedly lower in widowed (61.5%), divorced (54.8%) and single (47.3%), while participation reached 68.4% in married individuals. This corresponded to ORs of 0.59 (95% CI 0.58-0.59) for widowed, 0.56 (95% CI 0.55-0.56) for divorced and 0.47 (95% CI 0.47-0.48) for single, compared to married individuals. Individuals married to a participating partner were five times more likely to participate than married individuals with a non-participating partner, regardless of gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Marital status was strongly associated with participation in colorectal cancer screening, and participation was even higher in married individuals with a participating partner. Future efforts to increase participation in colorectal cancer screening could potentially benefit from considering the role of partner concordance.

Use of a GP-endorsed non-participant reminder letter to promote uptake of bowel scope screening: A randomised controlled trial in a hard-to-reach population

Previous research suggests that sending non-participants a reminder letter, 1 year after their initial invitation, can improve coverage for bowel scope screening (BSS), also known as flexible sigmoidoscopy screening. We hypothesised that adding a general practitioner's (GPs) endorsement to the reminder letter could improve coverage even further. We conducted a randomised controlled trial in North West London, UK. Participants were screening-eligible men and women who had not responded to their initial BSS invitation at least 12 months prior to the trial period. Eligible adults were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a GP-endorsed reminder letter, or a standard reminder letter from June to August 2019. Logistic regression models were used to test the effect of the GP endorsement on attendance at BSS, adjusting for sex, clinical commissioning group, and local area socioeconomic deprivation. In total, 1200 participants were enrolled into the study and randomised to either the control (n = 600) or the intervention (n = 600) group. Those who received the GP-endorsed reminder letter were only slightly more likely to attend BSS than those who received the standard reminder letter (4% vs. 3%); this difference was not statistically significant (Adjusted OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.69, 2.43). Adding a GP-endorsement to the annual reminder letter did not have an effect on attendance at BSS. One possible explanation for this is that the endorsement used was not personalised enough. Future research should examine stronger GP-endorsements or other methods to promote uptake.

Implementation Strategies for Interventions Aiming to Increase Participation in Mail-Out Bowel Cancer Screening Programs: A Realist Review

Background: Bowel cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer and the third most common cause of cancer-related death, with 1,849,518 new cases of bowel diagnosed and 880,792 deaths reported globally in 2018 alone. Survival can be improved through early detection via national mail-out bowel cancer screening programs; however, participation remains low in many countries. Behavior change is therefore required to increase participation. This realist review aims to (a) identify the behavior change techniques (BCTs) used in each intervention, (b) understand the mechanisms of action (MoAs) responsible for the BCT effectiveness, and (c) apply a behavior change model to inform how MoAs can be combined to increase screening participation.

Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature for interventions aiming to increase participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening. We used a four-stage realist synthesis approach whereby (1) interventions were extracted from each study; (2) BCTs applied in each intervention were identified and coded using the BCT Taxonomy-v1; (3) the Theory and Techniques Tool was used to link BCTs to their MoA; and (4) BCTs and MoAs were categorized according to their effectiveness and what Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) stage of change they would affect.

Results: We identified 68 intervention trials using 26 unique BCTs and 13 MoAs to increase participation. Sixteen BCTs and 10 MoAs were identified within the interventions that successfully increased participation rates. Interventions targeting both stages of the HAPA model had a higher success rate (80%) than those targeting one stage of change (51%). When targeting only one stage, interventions targeting the volitional stage had a higher success rate (71%) than interventions targeting only the motivational stage of change (26%).

Conclusion: Importantly, this review identified a suite of BCTs and MoAs effective for increasing participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs. With increased participation in bowel cancer screening leading to improved survival, our findings are key to informing the improvement of policy and interventions that aim to increase screening using specific strategies at key stages of health decision-making.