1
|
Im YR, Abdul Latip SNB, Zielinska AP, Pawa N. Ethnicity is a missing parameter in colorectal cancer screening programmes in the United Kingdom. Public Health 2020; 190:e14-e15. [PMID: 33323189 DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2020] [Accepted: 11/04/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Ri Im
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, Twickenham Road, Isleworth, TW7 6AF, UK; Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK
| | - Siti Nadiah Binte Abdul Latip
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, Twickenham Road, Isleworth, TW7 6AF, UK
| | - Agata Pamela Zielinska
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, Twickenham Road, Isleworth, TW7 6AF, UK; Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK
| | - Nikhil Pawa
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, Twickenham Road, Isleworth, TW7 6AF, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Deding U, Henig AS, Hindersson P, Torp-Pedersen C, Bøggild H. Determinants of non-participation in colon examination following positive stool sample in colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Public Health 2020; 29:1118-1124. [PMID: 31329870 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckz072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Social inequalities has been shown for participation in colorectal cancer screening and recently in the initial stool sample blood test. If these differences persist at follow-up colon examination after a positive stool test, it would suggest that social inequality in screening may be greater than the inequality observed in initial stool sample blood test. METHODS All data were derived from national registers. Using logistic regression analyses, odds of non-participation for follow-up colon examination were estimated based on age group, educational level, income quartile, immigration status and marital status in men and in women, who had participated in initial stool sample test for blood with a positive result. RESULTS Among 20 849 men and 16 565 women invited for follow-up colonoscopy in the period 2014-15, 10.63 and 11.37%, respectively, did not attend. In men, odds of non-participation were higher in the eldest, those with lower income and lower educational level, in immigrants and in singles. Odds ratio (OR) in males of highest income quartile was 0.54 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46; 0.63] compared with lowest income quartile. In women, the differences were not as large. OR in females of highest income quartile was 0.73 (95% CI 0.61; 0.87) compared with lowest income quartile. CONCLUSION Sociodemographic differences in odds of non-participation exist in follow-up colon examination in the Danish colorectal cancer screening. Differences were evident in all subgroups of the male population. The same patterns were seen in women. Social inequalities in participation for follow-up colon examination can increase overall social inequality and consequently, lead to health disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrik Deding
- Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg Øst, Denmark
| | - Anna Sharon Henig
- Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg Øst, Denmark
| | - Peter Hindersson
- Clinical Biochemistry, Regional Hospital North, Hjørring, Denmark
| | - Christian Torp-Pedersen
- Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg Øst, Denmark.,Unit of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Henrik Bøggild
- Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg Øst, Denmark.,Unit of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kelly C, Pericleous M, Hendy J, de Lusignan S, Ahmed A, Vandrevala T, Ala A. Interventions to improve the uptake of screening across a range of conditions in Ethnic Minority Groups: a systematic review. Int J Clin Pract 2018; 72:e13202. [PMID: 29920875 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.13202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2017] [Accepted: 04/15/2018] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Screening programmes are well established in cancer, and are now being implemented in other conditions. An effective screening programme leads to early disease detection and improved outcomes but its impact is dependent on the quality of the test and the proportion of the target population participating. A further consideration is that uptake of screening by minority groups is low. PURPOSE To determine which interventions have successfully increased screening uptake amongst minorities. DATA SOURCES Medline, Cochrane database and the grey literature were searched from 1990 to 1st March 2016. STUDY SELECTION Fifty-five English language studies that assessed uptake of screening in any minority population in the country of study aged over 18 years and that included a comparison arm. DATA EXTRACTION Independent data extraction was undertaken by two researchers (CK and MP), using a predesigned data extraction form (DEF) which assisted retrieval of the core contents of each study and the organisation of material. DATA SYNTHESIS Evidence was organised by screening test and type of intervention. Two authors (CK and MP) extracted data into evidence tables to enable comparison of study characteristics and findings. The heterogeneity of methods precluded a meta-analysis thus results are descriptive. Evidence was also assessed, using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tables. RESULTS This systematic review appraises data from international studies on a variety of minority groups, interventions and screening programmes providing a narrative review of their success and limitations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Kelly
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey, UK
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, FHMS, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK
| | - Marinos Pericleous
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey, UK
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, FHMS, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK
| | - Jane Hendy
- Brunel Business School, Brunel University, London, UK
| | - Simon de Lusignan
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, FHMS, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK
| | - Ayesha Ahmed
- Brunel Business School, Brunel University, London, UK
| | | | - Aftab Ala
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey, UK
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, FHMS, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Benito L, Farre A, Binefa G, Vidal C, Cardona A, Pla M, García M. Factors related to longitudinal adherence in colorectal cancer screening: qualitative research findings. Cancer Causes Control 2017; 29:103-114. [PMID: 29170881 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-017-0982-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2017] [Accepted: 11/15/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The effectiveness of screening in colorectal cancer prevention depends on sustained participation rates. The objective of this study was to explore factors related to the longitudinal adherence of screening behavior in the context of a biennial population-based cancer screening program. METHODS Eight focus groups were conducted with individuals who were invited two or three consecutive times to a population-based colorectal cancer screening program using a fecal occult blood test and who agreed to participate in the program at least once (n = 45). The criteria used to select the study members included adherence to fecal occult blood test maintenance, factors regarding their initial participation in the colorectal cancer screening, sex, and contextual educational level. RESULTS The participants expressed a high level of satisfaction with the program; however, they showed a low level of understanding with respect to cancer screening. Consulting a general practitioner was cited by all participants as an important factor that mediated their final decision or influenced their behavior as a whole with regard to the program. Fear played a different role in the screening behavior for regular and irregular adherent participants. In the adherent participants, fear facilitated their continued participation in the screening program, whereas for the irregular participants, fear led them to avoid or refuse further screening. Having a close person diagnosed with colorectal cancer was a facilitator for the regular adherent participants. The irregular adherent participants showed some relaxation with respect to screening after a negative result and considered that further screening was no longer necessary. CONCLUSION Considering the importance of primary healthcare professionals in the decision regarding sustained participation, it is important to better engage them with cancer screening programs, as well as improve the communication channels to provide accurate and balanced information for both health professionals and individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Llucia Benito
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain.,Institute of Biomedical Research, IDIBELL, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain.,Fundamental Care and Medical-Surgical Nursing Department, School of Nursing, University of Barcelona, C/Feixa Llarga, s/n. Campus de Bellvitge, 08907, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain
| | - Albert Farre
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Gemma Binefa
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain.,Institute of Biomedical Research, IDIBELL, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain
| | - Carmen Vidal
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain.,Institute of Biomedical Research, IDIBELL, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain
| | - Angels Cardona
- AreaQ Evaluation and Qualitative Research SL, Domenech 7, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Margarita Pla
- Public Health, Mental Health and Perinatal Nursing Department, School of Nursing, University of Barcelona, C/Feixa Llarga, s/n. Campus de Bellvitge, 08907, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain
| | - Montse García
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain. .,Institute of Biomedical Research, IDIBELL, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Raine R, Atkin W, von Wagner C, Duffy S, Kralj-Hans I, Hackshaw A, Counsell N, Moss S, McGregor L, Palmer C, Smith SG, Thomas M, Howe R, Vart G, Band R, Halloran SP, Snowball J, Stubbs N, Handley G, Logan R, Rainbow S, Obichere A, Smith S, Morris S, Solmi F, Wardle J. Testing innovative strategies to reduce the social gradient in the uptake of bowel cancer screening: a programme of four qualitatively enhanced randomised controlled trials. PROGRAMME GRANTS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH 2017. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar05080] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BackgroundBowel cancer screening reduces cancer-specific mortality. There is a socioeconomic gradient in the uptake of the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP), which may lead to inequalities in cancer outcomes.ObjectiveTo reduce socioeconomic inequalities in uptake of the NHS BCSP’s guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBt) without compromising uptake in any socioeconomic group.DesignWorkstream 1 explored psychosocial determinants of non-uptake of gFOBt in focus groups and interviews. Workstream 2 developed and tested four theoretically based interventions: (1) ‘gist’ information, (2) a ‘narrative’ leaflet, (3) ‘general practice endorsement’ (GPE) and (4) an ‘enhanced reminder’ (ER). Workstream 3 comprised four national cluster randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the cost-effectiveness of each intervention.MethodsInterventions were co-designed with user panels, user tested using interviews and focus groups, and piloted with postal questionnaires. RCTs compared ‘usual care’ (existing NHS BCSP invitations) with usual care plus each intervention. The four trials tested: (1) ‘gist’ leaflet (n = 163,525), (2) ‘narrative’ leaflet (n = 150,417), (3) GPE on the invitation letter (n = 265,434) and (4) ER (n = 168,480). Randomisation was based on day of mailing of the screening invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) score associated with each individual’s home address was used as the marker of socioeconomic circumstances (SECs). Change in the socioeconomic gradient in uptake (interaction between treatment group and IMD quintile) was the primary outcome. Screening uptake was defined as the return of a gFOBt kit within 18 weeks of the invitation that led to a ‘definitive’ test result of either ‘normal’ (i.e. no further investigation required) or ‘abnormal’ (i.e. requiring referral for further testing). Difference in overall uptake was the secondary outcome.ResultsThe gist and narrative trials showed no effect on the SECs gradient or overall uptake (57.6% and 56.7%, respectively, compared with 57.3% and 58.5%, respectively, for usual care; allp-values > 0.05). GPE showed no effect on the gradient (p = 0.5) but increased overall uptake [58.2% vs. 57.5% in usual care, odds ratio (OR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.10;p < 0.0001]. ER showed a significant interaction with SECs (p = 0.005), with a stronger effect in the most deprived IMD quintile (14.1% vs. 13.3% in usual care, OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20;p = 0.003) than the least deprived (34.7% vs. 34.9% in usual care OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06;p = 0.98), and higher overall uptake (25.8% vs. 25.1% in usual care, OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11;p = 0.001). All interventions were inexpensive to provide.LimitationsIn line with NHS policy, the gist and narrative leaflets supplemented rather than replaced existing NHS BCSP information. This may have undermined their effect.ConclusionsEnhanced reminder reduced the gradient and modestly increased overall uptake, whereas GPE increased overall uptake but did not reduce the gradient. Therefore, given their effectiveness and very low cost, the findings suggest that implementation of both by the NHS BCSP would be beneficial. The gist and narrative results highlight the challenge of achieving equitable delivery of the screening offer when all communication is written; the format is universal and informed decision-making mandates extensive medical information.Future workSocioculturally tailored research to promote communication about screening with family and friends should be developed and evaluated.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN74121020.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 5, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosalind Raine
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Wendy Atkin
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ines Kralj-Hans
- Department of Biostatistics, King’s Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Allan Hackshaw
- University College London Cancer Trials Centre, London, UK
| | | | - Sue Moss
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Lesley McGregor
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Cecily Palmer
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mary Thomas
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Rosemary Howe
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Gemma Vart
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Roger Band
- Patient and Public Involvement Representative, Evesham, UK
| | - Stephen P Halloran
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Julia Snowball
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Neil Stubbs
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Graham Handley
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme North East Hub, Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, UK
| | - Richard Logan
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Eastern Hub, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Sandra Rainbow
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme London Hub, Northwick Park and St Marks Hospitals NHS Trust, Harrow, UK
| | - Austin Obichere
- North Central London Bowel Cancer Screening Centre, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Stephen Smith
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Midlands and North West Hub, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Hospital of St Cross, Rugby, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Francesca Solmi
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jane Wardle
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Cancer incidence and mortality projections in the UK until 2035. Br J Cancer 2016; 115:1147-1155. [PMID: 27727232 PMCID: PMC5117795 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 336] [Impact Index Per Article: 42.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2016] [Revised: 08/05/2016] [Accepted: 08/19/2016] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Cancer incidence and mortality projections are important for understanding the evolving landscape for cancer risk factors as well as anticipating future burden on the health service. Methods: We used an age–period–cohort model with natural cubic splines to estimate cancer cases and deaths from 2015 to 2035 based on 1979–2014 UK data. This was converted to rates using ONS population projections. Modified data sets were generated for breast and prostate cancers. Results: Cancer incidence rates are projected to decrease by 0.03% in males and increase by 0.11% in females yearly between 2015 and 2035; thyroid, liver, oral and kidney cancer are among the fastest accelerating cancers. 243 690 female and 270 261 male cancer cases are projected for 2035. Breast and prostate cancers are projected to be the most common cancers among females and males, respectively in 2035. Most cancers' mortality rate is decreasing; there are notable increases for liver, oral and anal cancer. For 2035, there are 95 961 female deaths projected and 116 585 male deaths projected. Conclusions: These findings stress the need to continue efforts to address cancer risk factors. Furthermore, the increased burden of the number of cancer cases and deaths as a result of the growing and ageing population should be taken into consideration by healthcare planners.
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy before the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention, it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those detected earlier as a result of screening. OBJECTIVES This review aims to answer the following questions.Does systematic screening increase the detection of AF compared with routine practice? Which combination of screening population, strategy and test is most effective for detecting AF compared with routine practice? What safety issues and adverse events may be associated with individual screening programmes? How acceptable is the intervention to the target population? What costs are associated with systematic screening for AF? SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to 11 November 2015. We searched other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites up to December 2015. We also searched reference lists of identified studies for potentially relevant studies, and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. We applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people 40 years of age and older were eligible. Two review authors (PM and CT) independently selected trials for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors (PM and CT) independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to present results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. As we identified only one study for inclusion, we performed no meta-analysis. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) method to assess the quality of the evidence and GRADEPro to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS One cluster-randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason, followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) versus routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people 65 years of age or older.Results show that both systematic screening and opportunistic screening of people over 65 years of age are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26; and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively; both moderate-quality evidence). We found no difference in the effectiveness of systematic screening and opportunistic screening (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.37; low-quality evidence). A subgroup analysis found that systematic screening and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76; and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62; and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared with GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Evidence suggests that systematic screening and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. Although these approaches have comparable effects on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly greater than the cost of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. Few studies have investigated effects of screening in other health systems and in younger age groups; therefore, caution needs to be exercised in relation to transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effects of the intervention on risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick S Moran
- Health Technology Assessment, Health Information and Quality Authority, George's Court, George's Lane, Smithfield, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, D7
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Reinvitation to screening colonoscopy: a randomized-controlled trial of reminding letter and invitation to educational meeting on attendance in nonresponders to initial invitation to screening colonoscopy (REINVITE). Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 28:538-42. [PMID: 26967693 DOI: 10.1097/meg.0000000000000578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The response rate to initial invitation to population-based primary screening colonoscopy within the NordICC trial (NCT 00883792) in Poland is around 50%. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a reinvitation letter and invitation to an educational intervention on participation in screening colonoscopy in nonresponders to initial invitation. METHODS Within the NordICC trial framework, individuals living in the region of Warsaw, who were drawn from Population Registries and assigned randomly to the screening group, received an invitation letter and a reminder with a prespecified screening colonoscopy appointment date. One thousand individuals, aged 55 to 64 years, who did not respond to both the invitation and the reminding letter were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the reinvitation group (REI) and the educational meeting group (MEET). The REI group was sent a reinvitation letter and reminder 6 and 3 weeks before the new colonoscopy appointment date, respectively. The MEET group was sent an invitation 6 weeks before an educational meeting date. Outcome measures were participation in screening colonoscopy within 6 months and response rate within 3 months from the date of reinvitation or invitation to an educational meeting. RESULTS The response rate and the participation rate in colonoscopy were statistically significantly higher in the REI group compared with the MEET group (16.5 vs. 4.3%; P<0.001 and 5.2 vs. 2.1%; P=0.008, respectively). CONCLUSION A simple reinvitation letter results in a higher response rate and participation rate to screening colonoscopy than invitation to tailored educational meeting in nonresponders to previous invitations. (NCT01183156).
Collapse
|
9
|
Goto R, Hamashima C, Mun S, Lee WC. Why screening rates vary between Korea and Japan--differences between two national healthcare systems. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015; 16:395-400. [PMID: 25684461 DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.2.395] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Both Japan and Korea provide population-based screening programs. However, screening rates are much higher in Korea than in Japan. To clarify the possible factors explaining the differences between these two countries, we analyzed the current status of the cancer screening and background healthcare systems. Population- based cancer screening in Korea is coordinated well with social health insurance under a unified insurer system. In Japan, there are over 3,000 insurers and coordinating a comprehensive strategy for cancer screening promotion has been very difficult. The public healthcare system also has influence over cancer screening. In Korea, public healthcare does not cover a wide range of services. Almost free cancer screening and subsidization for medical cost for cancers detected in population-screening provides high incentive to participation. In Japan, on the other hand, a larger coverage of medical services, low co-payment, and a lenient medical audit enables people to have cancer screening under public health insurance as well as the broad range of cancer screening. The implementation of evidence-based cancer screening programs may be largely dependent on the background healthcare system. It is important to understand the impacts of each healthcare system as a whole and to match the characteristics of a particular health system when designing an efficient cancer screening system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rei Goto
- The Hakubi Center of Advanced Research, Graduate School of Economic, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan E-mail :
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Piloting the Impact of Three Interventions on Guaiac Faecal Occult Blood Test Uptake within the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL 2015; 2015:928251. [PMID: 26525423 PMCID: PMC4615211 DOI: 10.1155/2015/928251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2015] [Accepted: 06/02/2015] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
This study evaluated the impact of three interventions on uptake of the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) in Greater London. The interventions were designed to improve awareness and understanding of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) and assist stool sampling. Logistic regression analysis of BCSP London data (N = 205,541 invitees aged 60–74) compared uptake at 12 weeks between intervention groups and a control group, sent kits as usual between January-April 2013 and January-April 2014. An endorsement flyer, included with gFOBT kits, had no impact on uptake (P = 0.68). In 60–69-year-olds, there was a small but significant increase in modelled uptake amongst invitees sent both the flyer and a kit enhancement pack compared with controls (45.1% versus 43.4%, OR = 1.07, P = 0.047). In North East London, the flyer together with outdoor advertising was associated with a small but significant increase (45.6% versus 43.4%, OR = 1.09, P = 0.027). The largest increases were seen when all three interventions (flyer, pack, and advertising) were combined (49.5% versus 43.4%, OR = 1.28, P < 0.001). The increased uptake in the intervention groups was largest in “first-timers” and smaller amongst previous nonresponders and previously screened invitees.
Collapse
|
11
|
Geurts SME, Massat NJ, Duffy SW. Likely effect of adding flexible sigmoidoscopy to the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: impact on colorectal cancer cases and deaths. Br J Cancer 2015; 113:142-9. [PMID: 26110973 PMCID: PMC4647530 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.76] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2014] [Revised: 01/07/2015] [Accepted: 01/27/2015] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: From 2013, once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at age 55 is being phased into the England National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (NHSBCSP), augmenting biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) at ages 60–74. Here, we project the impact of this change on colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and deaths prevented in England by mid-2030. Methods: We simulated the life-course of English residents reaching age 55 from 2013 onwards. Model inputs included population numbers, invitation rates and CRC incidence and mortality rates. The impact of gFOBT and FS alone on CRC incidence and mortality were derived from published trials, assuming an uptake of 50% for FS and 57% for gFOBT. For FS plus gFOBT, we assumed the gFOBT effect to be 75% of the gFOBT alone impact. Results: By mid-2030, 8.5 million individuals will have been invited for once-only FS screening. Adding FS to gFOBT screening is estimated to prevent an extra 9627 (−10%) cases and 2207 (−12%) deaths by mid-2030. If FS uptake is 38% or 71%, respectively, an extra 7379 (−8%) or 13 689 (−15%) cases and 1691 (−9%) or 3154 (−17%) deaths will be prevented by mid-2030. Conclusions: Adding once-only FS at age 55 to the NHSBCSP will prevent ∼10 000 CRC cases and ∼2000 CRC deaths by mid-2030 if FS uptake is 50%. In 2030, one cancer was estimated to be prevented per 150 FS screening episodes, and one death prevented per 900 FS screening episodes. The actual reductions will depend on the FS invitation schedule and uptake rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S M E Geurts
- 1] Policy Research Unit in Cancer Awareness, Screening and Early Diagnosis, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK [2] Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - N J Massat
- Policy Research Unit in Cancer Awareness, Screening and Early Diagnosis, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - S W Duffy
- Policy Research Unit in Cancer Awareness, Screening and Early Diagnosis, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Salas D, Vanaclocha M, Ibáñez J, Molina-Barceló A, Hernández V, Cubiella J, Zubizarreta R, Andreu M, Hernández C, Pérez-Riquelme F, Cruzado J, Carballo F, Bujanda L, Sarasqueta C, Portillo I, de la Vega-Prieto M, Morillas JD, Valentín V, Lanas A, Quintero E, Castells A. Participation and detection rates by age and sex for colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Causes Control 2014; 25:985-97. [PMID: 24859111 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-014-0398-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2014] [Accepted: 05/08/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare two strategies for colorectal cancer screening: one-time colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (and colonoscopy for positive) every 2 years, in order to determine which strategy provides the highest participation and detection rates in groups of sex and age. METHODS This analysis was performed with data from the first screening round within the COLONPREV study, a population-based, multicenter, nationwide trial carried out in Spain. Several logistic regression models were applied to identify the influence of the screening test on participation rates and detection of proximal and distal neoplasms, as well to identify the influence of age and sex: women aged 50-59 years, women aged 60-69 years, men aged 50-59 years, and men aged 60-69 years. RESULTS Participation was higher in women than in men, especially among women aged 50-59 years (25.91 % for colonoscopy and 35.81 % for FIT). Crossover from colonoscopy to FIT was higher among women than men, especially among those aged 60-69 years (30.37 %). In general, detection of any neoplasm and advanced adenoma was higher with colonoscopy than with FIT, but no significant differences were found between the two strategies for colorectal cancer detection. Detection of advanced adenoma in both arms was lower in women [specifically in women aged 50-59 years (OR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.25-0.38) than in men aged 60-69 years]. Women aged 50-59 years in the colonoscopy arm had a higher probability of detection of advanced adenoma (OR 4.49; 95 % CI 3.18-6.35), as well as of detection of neoplasms in proximal and distal locations (proximal OR 19.34; 95 % CI 12.07-31.00; distal OR 11.04; 95 % CI 8.13-15.01) than women of the same age in the FIT arm. These differences were also observed in the remaining groups but to a lesser extent. CONCLUSION Women were more likely to participate in a FIT-based strategy, especially those aged 50-59 years. The likelihood of detection of any neoplasm was higher in the colonoscopy arm for all the population groups studied, especially in women aged 50-59 years. Distinct population groups should be informed of the benefits of each screening strategy so that they may take informed decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dolores Salas
- General Directorate Public Health, Avda. Calatuña, 21, 46020, Valencia, Spain,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Greuter MJE, Xu XM, Lew JB, Dekker E, Kuipers EJ, Canfell K, Meijer GA, Coupé VMH. Modeling the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA). RISK ANALYSIS : AN OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE SOCIETY FOR RISK ANALYSIS 2014; 34:889-910. [PMID: 24172539 DOI: 10.1111/risa.12137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/02/2023]
Abstract
Several colorectal cancer (CRC) screening models have been developed describing the progression of adenomas to CRC. Currently, there is increasing evidence that serrated lesions can also develop into CRC. It is not clear whether screening tests have the same test characteristics for serrated lesions as for adenomas, but lower sensitivities have been suggested. Models that ignore this type of colorectal lesions may provide overly optimistic predictions of the screen-induced reduction in CRC incidence. To address this issue, we have developed the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA) model that includes the adenoma-carcinoma pathway and the serrated pathway to CRC as well as characteristics of colorectal lesions. The model structure and the calibration procedure are described in detail. Calibration resulted in 19 parameter sets for the adenoma-carcinoma pathway and 13 for the serrated pathway that match the age- and sex-specific adenoma and serrated lesion prevalence in the COlonoscopy versus COlonography Screening (COCOS) trial, Dutch CRC incidence and mortality rates, and a number of other intermediate outcomes concerning characteristics of colorectal lesions. As an example, we simulated outcomes for a biennial fecal immunochemical test screening program and a hypothetical one-time colonoscopy screening program. Inclusion of the serrated pathway influenced the predicted effectiveness of screening when serrated lesions are associated with lower screening test sensitivity or when they are not removed. To our knowledge, this is the first model that explicitly includes the serrated pathway and characteristics of colorectal lesions. It is suitable for the evaluation of the (cost)effectiveness of potential screening strategies for CRC.
Collapse
|
14
|
Hall NJ, Rubin GP, Dobson C, Weller D, Wardle J, Ritchie M, Rees CJ. Attitudes and beliefs of non-participants in a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer. Health Expect 2013; 18:1645-57. [PMID: 24268129 DOI: 10.1111/hex.12157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/28/2013] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uptake of colorectal cancer screening programmes needs to be improved or at least maintained in order to achieve projected reductions in mortality and morbidity. Understanding the origins of non-participation in screening is therefore important. OBJECTIVE To explore the beliefs and experiences of individuals who had not responded either to their screening invitation or reminder. DESIGN A qualitative study using in-depth interviews with non-participants from England's population-based colorectal cancer screening programme. Data collection and analysis were carried out using a grounded theory approach, with an emphasis on the constant comparison method, and continued until saturation (27 interviews). FINDINGS The interviews provided an in-depth understanding of a range of reasons and circumstances surrounding non-participation in screening, including contextual and environmental influences as well as factors specific to the screening test. Non-participation in screening was not necessarily associated with negative attitudes towards screening or a decision to not return a kit. Reasons for non-participation in screening included not feeling that participation is personally necessary, avoiding or delaying decision making, and having some degree of intention to take part but failing to do so because of practicalities, conflicting priorities or external circumstances. Beliefs, awareness and intention change over time. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS A range of approaches may be required to improve screening uptake. Some non-participants may already have a degree of intention to take part in screening in the future, and this group may be more responsive to interventions based on professional endorsement, repeat invitations, reminders and aids to making the test more practical.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola J Hall
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees, UK
| | - Christina Dobson
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees, UK
| | - David Weller
- Cancer Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jane Wardle
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mary Ritchie
- South of Tyne NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Centre, Gateshead, UK
| | - Colin J Rees
- South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Curative colorectal resections in patients aged 80 years and older: clinical characteristics, morbidity, mortality and risk factors. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013; 28:941-7. [PMID: 23242272 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-012-1626-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/28/2012] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The management of colorectal cancer in the elderly presents unique challenges. The objective of this study was to determine outcomes following curative colorectal resection in patients aged 80 years and older. PATIENTS AND METHODS Study design is retrospective. Data were extracted from the university hospital database and medical records of patients aged 80 years and older operated between April 2004 and December 2009. Intervention was curative colorectal resection. Main outcome measures include postoperative morbidity, mortality and individual risk factors associated with them. RESULTS Three hundred fifty-eight patients (43.8% males, age = 84 ± 3 years) were included; 72.6% received elective surgery. A significantly higher complication rate and 30 day, 1 year and 4 year mortality were present for emergency operations compared to elective (p < 0.001). One-year survival was 65.0% for elective resections and 55.1% for emergency. At 4 years of follow-up, survival was 49.2% for the elective vs. 27.6% for emergency. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score is the only factor associated with the 30-day mortality at the multivariate analysis (p < 0.01), Dukes staging with overall mortality (p < 0.005), sex and mode of the operation with major complications (p < 0.05). A limitation of the study is that is retrospective. CONCLUSIONS The highest mortality rates following colorectal surgery in the elderly are in the early postoperative period, especially for emergency operations and patients with significant comorbidities. However, the 1-year survival following elective curative resection for colorectal cancer approaches 65 %. ASA score and modality of the operation (elective vs. emergency) impacted on postoperative mortality and morbidity and could be used to select patients with more favourable outcomes.
Collapse
|
16
|
Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer 2013; 108:2205-40. [PMID: 23744281 PMCID: PMC3693450 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 629] [Impact Index Per Article: 57.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- M G Marmot
- UCL Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, UCL Institute of Health Equity, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HB,
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Moran PS, Flattery MJ, Teljeur C, Ryan M, Smith SM. Effectiveness of systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD009586. [PMID: 23633374 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009586.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy prior to the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those who are detected earlier as a result of screening. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to examine whether screening programmes increase the detection of new cases of AF compared to routine practice. The secondary objectives were to identify which combination of screening strategy and patient population is most effective, as well as assessing any safety issues associated with screening, its acceptability within the target population and the costs involved. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to March 2012. Other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites were searched up to June 2012. Reference lists of identified studies were also searched for potentially relevant studies and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people aged 40 years and over were eligible. Two authors (PM, CT or MF) independently selected the trials for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction were performed independently by two authors (PM, CT). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to present the results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. Since only one included study was identified, no meta-analysis was performed. MAIN RESULTS One cluster randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) to routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people aged 65 years or older. The risk of bias in the included study was judged to be low.Both systematic and opportunistic screening of people over the age of 65 years are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26 and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively). The number needed to screen in order to detect one additional case compared to routine practice was 172 (95% CI 94 to 927) for systematic screening and 167 (95% CI 92 to 806) for opportunistic screening. Both systematic and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76 and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62 and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No data on the effectiveness of screening in different ethnic or socioeconomic groups were available. There were insufficient data to compare the effectiveness of screening programmes in different healthcare settings.Systematic screening was associated with a better overall uptake rate than opportunistic screening (53% versus 46%) except in the ≥ 75 years age group where uptake rates were similar (43% versus 42%). In both screening programmes men were more likely to participate than women (57% versus 50% in systematic screening, 49% versus 41% in opportunistic screening) and younger people (65 to 74 years) were more likely to participate than people aged 75 years and over (61% versus 43% systematic, 49% versus 42% opportunistic). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared to GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Systematic and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. While both approaches have a comparable effect on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly more than that of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. The lack of studies investigating the effect of screening in other health systems and younger age groups means that caution needs to be exercised in relation to the transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effect of the intervention on the risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick S Moran
- Health Technology Assessment, Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ferroni E, Camilloni L, Jimenez B, Furnari G, Borgia P, Guasticchi G, Giorgi Rossi P. How to increase uptake in oncologic screening: a systematic review of studies comparing population-based screening programs and spontaneous access. Prev Med 2012; 55:587-96. [PMID: 23064024 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.10.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2012] [Revised: 09/10/2012] [Accepted: 10/02/2012] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cervical, breast and colorectal cancer (CRC) screenings are universally recommended interventions. High coverage of the target population represents the most important factor in determining their success. This systematic review aimed at assessing the effectiveness of population-based screening programs in increasing coverage compared to spontaneous access. METHODS Electronic databases and national and regional websites were searched. We included all studies on interventions aimed at increasing screening participation published between 1999 and 2009; for those published before, we consulted the Jepson et al. review (2000). We compared spontaneous access (including no intervention) vs population-based screening programs actively inviting the target population. Among the latter, we compared GP-based vs invitation letter-based interventions. RESULTS The invitation letter vs no intervention showed significantly more participation (RR=1.60 95%CI 1.33-1.92; RR=1.52 95%CI 1.28-1.82; RR=1.15 95%CI 1.12-1.19, for breast, cervical and CRC screenings, respectively). GP-based interventions, although more heterogeneous, showed a significant effect when compared with no intervention for breast (RR=1.74 95%CI 1.25-2.43), but not for cervical and CRC. No significant differences were found between invitation letter-based and GP-based organization (RR=0.99 95%CI 0.94-1.05; RR=1.08 95%CI 0.99-1.17, for breast and cervical cancer, respectively). CONCLUSION Population-based programs are more effective than spontaneous screening in obtaining higher testing uptake. Both invitation letter-based and GP-based programs are effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Ferroni
- Laziosanità, Public Health Agency, Lazio Region, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Kadambi A, Leipold RJ, Kansal AR, Sorensen S, Getsios D. Inclusion of compliance and persistence in economic models: past, present and future. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2012; 10:365-379. [PMID: 23030640 DOI: 10.1007/bf03261872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Economic models are developed to provide decision makers with information related to the real-world effectiveness of therapeutics, screening and diagnostic regimens. Although compliance with these regimens often has a significant impact on real-world clinical outcomes and costs, compliance and persistence have historically been addressed in a relatively superficial fashion in economic models. In this review, we present a discussion of the current state of economic modelling as it relates to the consideration of compliance and persistence. We discuss the challenges associated with the inclusion of compliance and persistence in economic models and provide an in-depth review of recent modelling literature that considers compliance or persistence, including a brief summary of previous reviews on this topic and a survey of published models from 2005 to 2012. We review the recent literature in detail, providing a therapeutic-area-specific discussion of the approaches and conclusions drawn from the inclusion of compliance or persistence in economic models. In virtually all publications, variation of model parameters related to compliance and persistence was shown to have a significant impact on predictions of economic outcomes. Growing recognition of the importance of compliance and persistence in the context of economic evaluations has led to an increasing number of economic models that consider these factors, as well as the use of more sophisticated modelling techniques such as individual simulations that provide an avenue for more rigorous consideration of compliance and persistence than is possible with more traditional methods. However, we note areas of continuing concern cited by previous reviews, including inconsistent definitions, documentation and tenuous assumptions required to estimate the effect of compliance and persistence. Finally, we discuss potential means to surmount these challenges via more focused efforts to collect compliance and persistence data.
Collapse
|
20
|
Tum SJ, Maree JE, Clarke M. Creating awareness and facilitating cervical and breast cancer screening uptake through the use of a Community Health Worker: a pilot intervention study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2012; 22:107-16. [PMID: 22966910 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
In South Africa, cervical cancer is the most common female cancer followed by breast cancer. Despite the high incidence of these cancers, population-based screening is limited to cervical screening available at primary health clinics. Cervical screening uptake is, however, low. In 2009 a new cancer prevention initiative was launched in a specific resource poor community in Tshwane, South Africa. The low cervical screening uptake as well as a potentially low breast screening uptake could have resulted in the failure of this initiative. The purpose of the study was to develop and pilot test an intervention to address this risk. A Community Health Worker was trained and tasked to raise awareness of cervical and breast cancer and motivate women to take up screening. The intervention was assessed in terms of three outcomes: screening uptake, awareness and the value of the Community Health Worker. Despite the fact that the Community Health Worker's role was valued, screening uptake was disappointing and the level of awareness remained low. Unfortunately this intervention failed and once again we are left with the challenge of improving screening uptake.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S J Tum
- Adelaide Tambo School of Nursing Science, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Moss S. Colonoscopy as a primary screening method? J Med Screen 2012; 19:55-6. [PMID: 22753873 DOI: 10.1258/jms.2012.012058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
22
|
Rwamugira J, Maree JE. The findings of a nurse-lead intervention for detection and prevention of oral cancer. A pilot study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2011; 21:266-73. [PMID: 22111655 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2011.01310.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Despite the fact that South African men are among the group having the highest risk of developing oral cancer there is currently no population-based primary and secondary prevention services for oral cancer in South Africa. This study aimed to develop an intervention focusing on the prevention and detection of oral cancer and pilot test the intervention in a semi-urban resource-poor community in Tshwane. The intervention was assessed in terms of screening uptake, knowledge and awareness of oral cancer and perception of the educational material developed for the intervention. Statistics were used to calculate screening uptake while a pre- and post-intervention design was used to determine knowledge and awareness and perception of the educational material. Sampling was purposive and all people reporting for oral screening were recruited for the study. The sample totalled 65 (n= 65) and the participation rate was 100%. Notwithstanding a favourable report on the flyer as motivator to take up oral screening the number of people especially those in the high-risk group who reported for screening was disappointing. However, the strategy used to improve knowledge and awareness was successful. Ways to improve screening uptake should be explored and tested to improve the current intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Rwamugira
- Adelaide Tambo School of Nursing Science, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Wilschut JA, Habbema JDF, van Leerdam ME, Hol L, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuipers EJ, van Ballegooijen M. Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103:1741-51. [PMID: 22076285 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr385] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) can be adapted to a limited colonoscopy capacity by narrowing the age range or extending the screening interval, by using a more specific test or hemoglobin cutoff level for referral to colonoscopy, and by restricting surveillance colonoscopy. Which of these options is most clinically effective and cost-effective has yet to be established. METHODS We used the validated MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the number of colonoscopies, costs, and health effects of different screening strategies using guaiac FOBT or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at various hemoglobin cutoff levels between 50 and 200 ng hemoglobin per mL, different surveillance strategies, and various age ranges. We optimized the allocation of a limited number of colonoscopies on the basis of incremental cost-effectiveness. RESULTS When colonoscopy capacity was unlimited, the optimal screening strategy was to administer an annual FIT with a 50 ng/mL hemoglobin cutoff level in individuals aged 45-80 years and to offer colonoscopy surveillance to all individuals with adenomas. When colonoscopy capacity was decreasing, the optimal screening adaptation was to first increase the FIT hemoglobin cutoff value to 200 ng hemoglobin per mL and narrow the age range to 50-75 years, to restrict colonoscopy surveillance, and finally to further decrease the number of screening rounds. FIT screening was always more cost-effective compared with guaiac FOBT. Doubling colonoscopy capacity increased the benefits of FIT screening up to 100%. CONCLUSIONS FIT should be used at higher hemoglobin cutoff levels when colonoscopy capacity is limited compared with unlimited and is more effective in terms of health outcomes and cost compared with guaiac FOBT at all colonoscopy capacity levels. Increasing the colonoscopy capacity substantially increases the health benefits of FIT screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janneke A Wilschut
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Mistry M, Parkin DM, Ahmad AS, Sasieni P. Cancer incidence in the United Kingdom: projections to the year 2030. Br J Cancer 2011; 105:1795-803. [PMID: 22033277 PMCID: PMC3242594 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 199] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Projections of cancer incidence are important for planning health services and to provide a baseline for assessing the impact of public health interventions. Methods: Rates estimated from smooth function age–period–cohort modelling of cancer incidence data from Great Britain 1975 to 2007 are extrapolated to 2030 and applied to UK population projections. Prostate and breast cancer projections take into account the effect of screening. Results: Overall rates of cancer are projected to be stable over the next 20 years, but this masks individual changes. In both sexes, age-standardised rates of cancers of the stomach, larynx, bladder and leukaemia are projected to fall by ⩾1% per year, whereas cancers of the lip, mouth and pharynx (ICD-10 C00-C14) and melanoma are projected to increase by ⩾1% per year. The growing and aging populations will have a substantial impact: numbers of cancers in men and women are projected to increase by 55% (from 149 169 to 231 026) and 35% (from 148 716 to 200 929), respectively, between 2007 and 2030. The model used yields similar results to those of Nordpred, but is more flexible. Conclusion: Without new initiatives for smoking and obesity reduction, the number of cancers in the United Kingdom will increase substantially reflecting the growing and aging populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Mistry
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts & The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
What's out there making us sick? JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2011; 2012:605137. [PMID: 22262979 PMCID: PMC3202108 DOI: 10.1155/2012/605137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2011] [Accepted: 07/26/2011] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Throughout the continuum of medical and scientific history, repeated evidence has confirmed that the main etiological determinants of disease are nutritional deficiency, toxicant exposures, genetic predisposition, infectious agents, and psychological dysfunction. Contemporary conventional medicine generally operates within a genetic predestination paradigm, attributing most chronic and degenerative illness to genomic factors, while incorporating pathogens and psychological disorder in specific situations. Toxicity and deficiency states often receive insufficient attention as common source causes of chronic disease in the developed world. Recent scientific evidence in health disciplines including molecular medicine, epigenetics, and environmental health sciences, however, reveal ineluctable evidence that deficiency and toxicity states feature prominently as common etiological determinants of contemporary ill-health. Incorporating evidence from historical and emerging science, it is evident that a reevaluation of conventional wisdom on the current construct of disease origins should be considered and that new knowledge should receive expeditious translation into clinical strategies for disease management and health promotion. An analysis of almost any scientific problem leads automatically to a study of its history. —Ernst Mayr
Collapse
|
26
|
Fisher R, Rooney PS. Faecal occult blood testing in areas of high incidence and mortality; the effect of screening the population aged 50 to 59. Colorectal Dis 2011; 13:1024-9. [PMID: 20626761 DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02374.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM In central Liverpool, the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is 119% of the national average. Currently, screening is offered to those aged 60-70 through the National Bowel Cancer screening programme. A theoretical model showing the effect of the introduction of biennial screening in individuals aged 50-59 has been applied to the population of central Liverpool. METHOD The impact of screening using faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in individuals aged 50-59 in central Liverpool (n = 47,440; males 23,312) was assessed by a model based on three levels of compliance. RESULTS After modelling, the positive FOBT result for increased incidence of CRC, the positive predictive value for adenoma and cancer detection was calculated using age-specific positivity rates. The results indicate that between 120 and 162 new diagnoses of CRC per 100,000 population aged 50-59 could be detected by biennial screening, dependent on compliance rates. CONCLUSION Screening individuals aged 50-59 can identify early cancers and significant adenomas, which may contribute to a reduction in the expected high mortality rate found in this geographical area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Fisher
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Liverpool Medical School, Cedar House, Ashton Street, Liverpool, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Siddiqui MRS, Sajid MS, Khatri K, Kanri B, Cheek E, Baig MK. The role of physician reminders in faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Gen Pract 2011; 17:221-8. [PMID: 21861598 DOI: 10.3109/13814788.2011.601412] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer screening in the form of faecal occult blood (FOB) testing can significantly reduce the burden of this disease and has been used as early as the 1970s. Effective involvement of GPs along with reminding physicians prior to seeing a patient may improve uptake. OBJECTIVE This article is a systematic review of published literature examining the uptake of FOB testing after physician reminders as part of the colorectal cancer screening process. METHODS Electronic databases were searched from January 1975 to October 2010. All studies comparing physician reminders (Rem) with controls (NRem) were identified. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain a summary outcome. RESULTS Five comparative studies involving 25 287 patients were analyzed. There were 12 641 patients were in the Rem and 12 646 in the NRem group. All five studies obtained a higher percentage uptake when physician reminders were given. However, in only two of the studies were the percentage uptake significantly higher. There was significant heterogeneity among trials (I2 = 95%). The combined increase in FOB test uptake was not statistically significant (random effects model: risk difference = 6.6%, 95% CI: -2-14.7%; z = 1.59, P = 0.112). CONCLUSION Reminding physicians about those patients due for FOB testing may not improve the effectiveness of a colorectal cancer screening programme. Further studies are required and should focus on areas where there is a lower baseline uptake and areas with high levels of deprivation.
Collapse
|
28
|
Hewitson P, Ward AM, Heneghan C, Halloran SP, Mant D. Primary care endorsement letter and a patient leaflet to improve participation in colorectal cancer screening: results of a factorial randomised trial. Br J Cancer 2011; 105:475-80. [PMID: 21829202 PMCID: PMC3170960 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 108] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2011] [Revised: 06/06/2011] [Accepted: 06/16/2011] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The trial aimed to investigate whether a general practitioner's (GP) letter encouraging participation and a more explicit leaflet explaining how to complete faecal occult blood test (FOBT) included with the England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme invitation materials would improve uptake. METHODS A randomised controlled 2 × 2 factorial trial was conducted in the south of England. Overall, 1288 patients registered with 20 GPs invited for screening in October 2009 participated in the trial. Participants were randomised to either a GP's endorsement letter and/or an enhanced information leaflet with their FOBT kit. The primary outcome was verified with return of the test kit within 20 weeks. RESULTS Both the GP's endorsement letter and the enhanced procedural leaflet, each increased participation by ∼6% - the GP's letter by 5.8% (95% CI: 4.1-7.8%) and the leaflet by 6.0% (95% CI: 4.3-8.1%). On the basis of the intention-to-treat analysis, the random effects logistic regression model confirmed that there was no important interaction between the two interventions, and estimated an adjusted rate ratio of 1.11 (P=0.038) for the GP's letter and 1.12 (P=0.029) for the leaflet. In the absence of an interaction, an additive effect for receiving both the GP's letter and leaflet (11.8%, 95% CI: 8.5-16%) was confirmed. The per-protocol analysis indicated that the insertion of an electronic GP's signature on the endorsement letter was associated with increased participation (P=0.039). CONCLUSION Including both an endorsement letter from each patient's GP and a more explicit procedural leaflet could increase participation in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme by ∼10%, a relative improvement of 20% on current performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Hewitson
- Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Old Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Molina-Barceló A, Salas Trejo D, Peiró-Pérez R, Málaga López A. To participate or not? Giving voice to gender and socio-economic differences in colorectal cancer screening programmes. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2011; 20:669-78. [PMID: 21771129 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2011.01263.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
This paper examines the influence of gender and socio-economic status (SES) on participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Qualitative study with eight focus groups comprised of participants and non-participants in a CRC screening programme in Valencia (Spain), structural sample design and discursive analysis by gender, SES and participation. Non-participants and those with lower SES tended to have less knowledge about both the disease and the programme. Reasons for participation varied according to gender: women were motivated because they value the importance of self-care and early detection in order to prevent personal and family suffering while men were encouraged by their partners. Reasons for non-participation were also influenced by gender: women feared the results and considered the test unpleasant whereas men showed carelessness and lack of concern. In population-based programmes, people with lower SES and men are those with the most obstacles to participation due to low health literacy and traditional gender roles respectively. To increase participation in CRC screening programmes based on informed decision making and taking into account social inequalities, information should be more accessible, comprehensible and adapted to gender and SES differences and emphasise the greater vulnerability of men for CRC and the benefits of early detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Molina-Barceló
- Centro Superior de Investigación en Salud Pública, Valencia, Spain.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Mukherjee S, Fountain G, Stalker M, Williams J, Porrett TRC, Lunniss PJ. The 'straight to test' initiative reduces both diagnostic and treatment waiting times for colorectal cancer: outcomes after 2 years. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12:e250-4. [PMID: 20041913 DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.02182.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM This study aimed to determine whether a 'straight to test'(STT) strategy for 2-week wait (2 wk) referrals for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) reduced the time to diagnosis and treatment for patients with CRC. METHOD Consecutive 2-week referrals for suspected CRC over a period of 2 years from February 2007 were analysed. The times to the first diagnostic test and treatment and the cancers identified were analysed for those going to STT or the outpatient clinic. RESULTS Of 662 patients having a 2 wk referral, 519 (78.4%) were suitable for the hospital colorectal telephone triage service, 121 (18.3%) patients went to STT and 502 (75.8%) were seen in the clinic. Of these 401 (79.8%) underwent diagnostic tests and 25 (6.2%) had CRC and in 12 (2.9%) patients other cancers were detected. In the STT group, 7 (5.8%) patients were diagnosed with CRC. The median time to first diagnostic test was 12 days (IQR 9-13) in the STT pathway, compared with 23 days (17-31) in those seen in the clinic (P < 0.0001). The median time to first treatment was 40 (32-48) days for those via STT, compared to 46 (28-55) days for those seen in the clinic (P = 0.004). A total of 162 CRC were diagnosed during the study period of whom 34 (20.9%) were 2 wk referrals (5.1% of all suspected CRC 2 wk referrals), and 14 (2.1%) other cancers were detected via this pathway. CONCLUSION STT speeds up the patient pathway by reducing the time to diagnosis and treatment for patients with CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Mukherjee
- Academic Unit of Medical and Surgical Gastroenterology, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Homerton Hospital, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Schwalfenberg GK, Genuis SJ, Hiltz MN. Addressing vitamin D deficiency in Canada: a public health innovation whose time has come. Public Health 2010; 124:350-9. [PMID: 20413135 DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2010.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2009] [Revised: 01/20/2010] [Accepted: 03/03/2010] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
There is disturbing evidence of widespread vitamin D deficiency in many population groups, particularly within nations at high latitude. Numerous recent studies in the scientific literature associate vitamin D deficiency with a colossal increase in morbidity and mortality. Since Canada is at higher latitude, this review assesses the vitamin D status within the Canadian population. This review was prepared by assessing available medical and scientific literature from Medline, as well as by reviewing several books and conference proceedings. A standard 25(OH)D level of 75-80nmol/l or more was used to indicate vitamin D sufficiency. Between 70% and 97% of Canadians demonstrate vitamin D insufficiency. Furthermore, studies assessing 25(OH)D levels of vitamin D at 25-40nmol/l reveal that many Canadians have profoundly deficient levels. Repletion of vitamin D3 with 2000IU/day for those not receiving judicious sun exposure and those with no contra-indications would likely achieve normalized levels in more than 93% of patients, without risk of toxicity. Explicit directives regarding vitamin D assessment and management are urgently required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G K Schwalfenberg
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, 301, 9509-156 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5P 4J5, Canada.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Abstract
Achieving adequate levels of uptake in cancer screening requires a variety of approaches that need to be shaped by the characteristics of both the screening programme and the target population. Strategies to improve uptake typically produce only incremental increases. Accordingly, approaches that combine behavioural, organisational and other strategies are most likely to succeed. In conjunction with a focus on uptake, providers of screening services need to promote informed decision making among invitees. Addressing inequalities in uptake must remain a priority for screening programmes. Evidence informing strategies targeting low-uptake groups is scarce, and more research is needed in this area. Cancer screening has the potential to make a major contribution to early diagnosis initiatives in the United Kingdom, and will best be achieved through uptake strategies that emphasise wide coverage, informed choice and equitable distribution of cancer screening services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D P Weller
- Division of Community Health Sciences-General Practice, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond St., Edinburgh, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Abstract
For cancer screening programmes to bring about reductions in mortality, a substantial proportion of the population must participate. Programmes with low uptake can be ineffective and can promote inequalities in health-service provision. Strategies to promote uptake are multifaceted, reflecting differences in the cancers targeted, invitees, health-service contexts, and the tests themselves. Accordingly, there is no universal approach. Strategies should accommodate the many factors that can influence uptake and should incorporate the need to promote informed choice. Screening has the potential to cause harm, and there is an ethical imperative to seek out strategies that provide balanced information on cancer screening. Further research is needed to assess newer approaches to promoting uptake, such as IT-based programmes, and to identify strategies that are balanced, self-sustaining, and affordable.
Collapse
|