Abstract B10: Colorectal cancer and screening knowledge: A focus group investigation

Abstract

Abstract Aim: To explore Mexican American men and women's opinions of what would be the content and structure of informative and effective decision aids for colorectal cancer (CRC) that would optimize decision making of preventative measures and screening procedures. Methods: A qualitative study consisting of 5 focus groups (3 of women and 2 of men) was conducted. The criteria for eligibility consisted of being 50 years or older, El Paso county resident, Hispanic, and fluent in English. All focus groups were held at the University of Texas at El Paso and lasted on average 1 hour. Upon arrival, participants were asked to sign a consent form stating their voluntarily participation and completed a demographic questionnaire. After each focus group session, participants were debriefed and received a $20 gift certificate. A trained moderator led each focus group session, using as a guide a set of questions previously established by the team of researchers. All focus group sessions were recorded with the consent of all participants and kept confidential. All recordings were transcribed by two different assistants and evaluated to find major themes and sub-themes. The transcriptions and themes were then entered into the program ATLAS.ti 5.2. A coding framework was developed based on the participants' comments. Broad topics and salient points were identified to evaluate overlapping themes. Results: A total of 23 individuals participated in the focus groups. The majority of the participants (73.9%) were married women, almost half were employed (43.5%), and more than a third had some college training (40%). There were 6 major themes found across focus group sessions: current knowledge, barriers, external controls, desired information, decision aid tools, and elements of persuasion. We found that not only participants lacked education about CRC and screenings but across focus groups, participants had some misleading information such as Hispanics are not at risk for CRC, men are more prone to CRC, CRC isnot hereditary, and CRC cannot be diagnosed on its early stages. Furthermore, participants shared, based on their past experience, various means to communicate and educate the community in an effective manner. Conclusion: In spite of the large body of information on CRC and screening, there were many misconceptions and lack of meaningful knowledge across focus groups. However, faith, fate, and family play a large role as decision aid tools in getting screened. Perhaps, future studies might focus their efforts on one or all three components. Furthermore, networks of family and friends seem effective dissemination tools to advocate CRC screening. These networks would be efficient in dissipating misinformation and reducing fear of procedures with the accurate information. Furthermore, according to their suggestions, several decision aid tools should be incorporated and presented together as one large and more comprehensive decision aid tool to help individuals make informed decisions. Citation Information: Cancer Prev Res 2010;3(1 Suppl):B10.