Bowel Screening Research Articles

Colorectal cancer and adenoma screening using urinary volatile organic compound (VOC) detection: early results from a single-centre bowel screening population (UK BCSP)

BackgroundThe United Kingdom (UK) bowel cancer screening programme has reduced mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC), but poor uptake with stool-based tests and lack of specificity of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT), has prompted investigation for a more suitable screening test. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a urinary volatile organic compounds (VOC)-based screening tool for CRC.MethodsThe urine from FOBT-positive patients was analysed using field asymmetric ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) and gas chromatography coupled with ion mobility spectrometry (GC–IMS). Data were analysed using a machine learning algorithm to calculate the test accuracy for correct classification of CRC against adenomas and other gastrointestinal pathology.ResultsOne hundred and sixty-three patients were enrolled in the study. Test accuracy was high for differentiating CRC from control: area under the curve (AUC) 0.98 (95% CI 0.93–1) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.67–0.97) using FAIMS and GC–IMS respectively. Correct classification of CRC from adenoma was high with AUC range 0.83–0.92 (95% CI 0.43–1.0). Classification of adenoma from control was poor with AUC range 0.54–0.61 (95% CI 0.47–0.75) using both analytical modalities.ConclusionsCRC was correctly distinguished from adenomas or no bowel pathology using urinary VOC markers, within the bowel screening population. This pilot study demonstrates the potential of this method for CRC detection, with higher test uptake and superior sensitivity than FOBT. In addition, this is the first application of GC–IMS in CRC detection which has shown high test accuracy and usability.

Feasibility and economic assessment of chromocolonoscopy for detection of proximal serrated neoplasia within a population-based colorectal cancer screening programme (CONSCOP): an open-label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

Most post-colonoscopy interval colorectal cancers are proximal; serrated polyps are often precursors to these cancers and are considered difficult to detect. We assessed the safety, feasibility, and economic effect of chromocolonoscopy on detection of proximal serrated neoplasia. We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial including patients from Bowel Screening Wales centres. Participants who tested positive for faecal occult blood and who were eligible for and considered fit to have colonoscopy (patients with known cases of polyposis syndromes, Lynch syndrome, and chronic inflammatory disease were excluded) were randomly assigned (1:1; with the use of minimisation, stratified by centre with an 80:20 random element) to either standard white light colonoscopy (standard group) or chromocolonoscopy (indigo carmine dye [0·2%]; chromocolonoscopy group) using a secure, internet-based, computerised, randomisation system that used centralised, dynamic allocation. Participants were followed up for 1 year and data from index colonoscopies and associated clearance procedures were analysed. All proximal polyps were reviewed by an expert pathologist panel. The main outcome on which power was based was time taken to perform the colonoscopy procedure, defined as from the time when the scope was inserted to withdrawal from the anus, assessed in the per-protocol population. The non-inferiority margin was 15 min. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01972451. Between Nov 20, 2014, and June 16, 2016, 741 (72%) of 1031 patients screened were eligible and consented: 360 were randomly assigned to white light colonoscopy and 381 to chromocolonoscopy. In the chromocolonoscopy group, the procedure took a mean of 36·8 min (SD 15·0), compared with a mean of 30·6 min (13·7) in the standard group (mean difference 6·3 min [95% CI 4·2-8·4] longer with chromocolonoscopy than in the standard group). The mean difference was within the prespecified non-inferiority margin. Detection rates for proximal serrated lesions were significantly higher in the chromocolonoscopy group than in the control group (45 [12%] of 381 patients vs 23 [6%] of 360 patients; odds ratio 1·96 [95% CI 1·16-3·32]; p=0·012). Serious adverse events (four cases of postpolypectomy bleeding [two in each group], and one case of anxiety and hyperventilation [in the chromocolonoscopy group]), colonoscopy quality measures, comfort scores, and sedation were similar between groups. Chromocolonoscopy is feasible within a population-based colorectal cancer screening programme, is safe, and has significantly increased detection of proximal serrated neoplasia and other polyp types compared with standard colonoscopy. Larger randomised trials of chromocolonoscopy, powered for improved detection of significant serrated polyps and for longer-term follow-up to investigate the effect on reduction of interval cancers within screening populations, are warranted. Health and Care Research Wales (RfPPB-1021).

Factors contributing to low readiness and capacity of culturally diverse participants to use the Australian national bowel screening kit.

Bowel screening is an effective way to promote early detection of bowel cancer. Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) people face considerable barriers to screening. This qualitative study explored perceptions towards, and usability of, Australia's national bowel screening kit with members of two migrant communities. Thirty-three people (aged 50-79 years) from Serbian and Macedonian communities in the Illawarra region in New South Wales, Australia, participated in one of five interactive focus group sessions. Sessions used innovative 'customer journey' techniques to understand participants' experience of each step of the faecal occult blood test process. Participants discussed knowledge of bowel cancer and attitudes to screening, and participated in a collective mock use of a test kit. Sessions were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed by two researchers in collaboration with bicultural health workers. Multiple factors contributed to low readiness and capacity to use the kit, including limited promotion of the program in community languages, complicated and poorly sequenced kit instructions, and confusion around the order and labelling of kit components. Participants suggested several ways to improve kits to improve uptake by CALD communities. Simplified and targeted promotion of bowel screening programs in community languages, and improved kit design, may support participation of CALD populations in screening programs.

36. Snapshot of malignant polyps over an 11-year period: A quality improvement project

Background: Since the introduction of the National Bowel Screening Program in 2006, polypectomy is one of the largest caseloads in anatomical pathology with a reported rate of malignancy ranging from 0.7% to 5.6%. Prognostication and further management depends on the pathological features. Pathology reports are the sole document for communication of information.

Increasing bowel cancer screening participation: integrating population-wide, primary care and more targeted approaches.

Participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is suboptimal. Given the program's enormous potential to save lives, Cancer Council Victoria has prioritised increased screening participation as part of its strategic plan. This paper describes the implementation, and evaluation where available, of Cancer Council Victoria programs to increase participation, supported by a mix of own organisation and Victorian state health department funding. Type of programs: At the population level, Cancer Council Victoria has delivered television-led mass media campaigns to motivate age-eligible individuals to complete and return their NBCSP kit. It has also delivered targeted awareness and education programs for underscreened populations including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities, and groups experiencing social disadvantage. Programs involving general practice have also been trialled to improve the knowledge and confidence of general practitioners (GPs) to discuss bowel screening with their patients, and to implement identification, reminder and follow-up systems to improve bowel screening participation. There is strong evidence to support the use of mass media public health campaigns, which have resulted in significant increases in screening kit return rates. Targeted education sessions with underscreened communities have led to increases in knowledge about bowel cancer screening, confidence to do the test and intention to participate in the NBCSP in communities where these sessions have been trialled. Early findings suggest that GP endorsement strategies are welcomed by patients and are an effective way to encourage NBCSP participation. System changes using patient information systems may be more challenging, given the inconsistent entry of NBCSP data. Our work to date demonstrates that there is a strong case for regular, widespread mass media strategies to increase NBCSP participation. There is also evidence to support more tailored, complementary approaches with dedicated education programs for underscreened groups, and active and sustained engagement with underscreened communities and primary care providers to overcome personal, cultural and systems barriers to screening. Improved data capture capabilities are needed to better implement and evaluate the impact of future strategies to improve NBCSP participation.

Faecal immunochemical tests for occult blood testing should not be used outside of bowel screening: an audit of a large general practice.

INTRODUCTION The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) detects small quantities of human haemoglobin in faeces. This test has increasingly become the screening tool of choice in bowel cancer screening programmes worldwide, including New Zealand's upcoming national screening programme. AIM This study audited the appropriate use of faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) in general practice as current recommendations discourage the use of FIT outside the National Bowel Screening Programme. METHODS Data on all FIT requested by a multiclinic general practice serving 16000 patients from May 2017 to May 2018 were extracted from clinical records. Patient characteristics, results of tests, clinical rationale for the test, number of referrals and results and the completeness of clinical evaluation were recorded. RESULTS In all, 184 patients received an FIT, with 13 (7.1%) positive and 145 (78.8%) negative tests, and 26 (14.1%) tests declined by the laboratory. Nine patients (69.2%) with a positive FIT, 12 patients (8.1%) with a negative FIT and one patient (3.8%) with a declined test were referred to gastroenterology services. Seven colorectal cancers were detected, all in patients with a positive FIT who were aged between 67 and 91 years. FIT was requested most for changes in bowel habit (53%) and blood in stool (15%); 10% of tests were ordered for reassurance and 9% did not record an indication for the test. Two general practitioners (of 17 in the practice) accounted for over half of all tests requested. CONCLUSIONS Because FIT is only a screening tool for colorectal cancer, direct referral is recommended for symptomatic patients. Although cancers were detected only in patients with positive FITs, these patients would have qualified for direct referral for definitive investigation, and a referral was made concurrently. Awaiting test results may also delay necessary referrals and a negative FIT may produce false reassurance.

Acceptability of receiving lifestyle advice at cervical, breast and bowel cancer screening

Cancer screening could be an opportunity to deliver cancer prevention advice, but it is not known how such information would be received. We explored willingness to receive lifestyle advice in the context of the English National Health Service cervical, breast, and bowel (FS; flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening programmes. A population-based survey was conducted in 2016 to collect nationally representative data on willingness to receive lifestyle advice across cervical (n = 768), breast (n = 420) and FS (n = 308) screening programmes. Additional items assessed the impact of lifestyle advice on screening attendance, preference for receiving advice in the event of an abnormal screening result, and timing of advice. Most respondents were willing to receive lifestyle advice around the time of cancer screening (cervical 78.9%, breast 79.4%, FS 81.8%), and if their results were abnormal (cervical 86.3%, breast 83.0%, FS 85.1%). A small proportion indicated it may discourage future attendance (cervical 4.9%, breast 7.0%, FS 8.8%). Most preferred information to be delivered at the screening appointment (cervical 69.8%, breast 72.6%, FS 70.7%). There were no associations between sociodemographic characteristics and willingness to receive lifestyle advice at breast screening. For those intending to attend cervical screening, non-White ethnicity and higher education were associated with increased willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Women were more likely to be willing to receive advice at FS screening than men. Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening is likely to be acceptable to the general population. The optimal approach for delivery needs careful consideration to minimise potential negative effects on screening attendance.

Two-month follow-up evaluation of a cancer awareness training workshop ("Talk Cancer") on cancer awareness, beliefs and confidence of front-line public health staff and volunteers.

People working across the health service, local government, community and voluntary sectors are appropriately placed to have discussions about cancer prevention and early diagnosis with members of the public. Cancer Research UK's training workshop (“Talk Cancer”) aims to increase awareness of cancer screening programmes and risk factors, promote more positive beliefs about cancer and increase confidence to discuss cancer with members of the public, among people working in these roles. This study evaluated “Talk Cancer” by surveying 178 trainees immediately before, immediately after, and two months after training in the United Kingdom.Results showed that “Talk Cancer” was effective at promoting and maintaining more positive beliefs about cancer and confidence to discuss cancer. While there was an improvement in awareness of risk factors immediately after the workshop, there was less evidence that this was maintained at two-months, but awareness was improved relative to baseline in most cases. Increased awareness of the national bowel screening programme was maintained at two-months. While awareness that screening programmes do not exist for oral, skin and prostate cancers was not maintained, awareness was higher than baseline. The majority of trainees (86%) indicated they had applied their learning in their role and 59% reported having had more conversations about cancer prevention and early diagnosis since training. The impact of “Talk Cancer” on trainees' beliefs and confidence persists beyond the workshop, however, ongoing support is required to maintain improvements in awareness of cancer risk factors and which cancer types do not have national screening programmes.

Reducing ethnic inequalities in bowel screening participation in New Zealand: A randomised controlled trial of telephone follow-up for non-respondents.

Objective To test whether a telephone follow-up service for high-needs ethnic groups increases bowel screening participation in non-responders to postal invitations. Methods Māori, Pacific, and Asian ethnicity individuals who failed to return a bowel screening test kit within four weeks of it being posted were randomly allocated (1:1) to a telephone active follow-up service or a control group. The active follow-up service made multiple attempts to contact the invitee and provide support. Participation rates at eight weeks’ post-randomisation were compared, and the effect of the intervention on overall participation rates was imputed. Results A total of 3828 eligible individuals were allocated to active follow-up and 3773 to the control group. The imputed potential overall increase in participation in the active follow-up group was 2.0% (95% CI = 0.6%–3.4%); however, the impact of follow-up varied significantly by ethnicity and deprivation. The imputed increase in participation was significant for Māori (5.2; CI = 1.8%–8.5%) and Pacific (3.6%; CI = 0.7%–6.4%), but not for Asian ethnicities (0.7%; CI=−1.1%–2.4%). In addition, the imputed increase was significant among high deprivation participants (3.9%; CI = 2.0%–5.9%), but not among low deprivation participants (0.3%; CI=−1.6%–2.2%). Conclusions Active follow-up led to higher bowel screening participation in Māori and Pacific but not in Asian ethnicities and was more effective in high deprivation subjects. Active follow-up significantly reduced but did not eliminate ethnic inequalities in bowel screening participation.

Benefits, Harms, and Cost-Effectiveness of Potential Age Extensions to the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program in Australia.

The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is rolling out 2-yearly immunochemical fecal occult blood test screening in people aged 50 to 74 years. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of extending the NBCSP to younger and/or older ages. A comprehensive validated microsimulation model, Policy1-Bowel, was used to simulate the fully rolled-out NBCSP and alternative strategies assuming screening starts at 40 or 45 years and/or ceases at 79 or 84 years given three scenarios: (i) perfect adherence (100%), (ii) high adherence (60%), and (ii) low adherence (40%, as currently achieved). The current NBCSP will reduce colorectal cancer incidence (mortality) by 23% to 51% (36% to 74%) compared with no screening (range reflects participation); extending screening to younger or older ages would result in additional reductions of 2 to 6 (2 to 9) or 1 to 3 (3 to 7) percentage points, respectively. With an indicative willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50,000/life-year saved (LYS), only screening from 50 to 74 years [incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER): A$2,984-5,981/LYS) or from 45 to 74 years (ICER: A$17,053-29,512/LYS) remained cost-effective in all participation scenarios. The number-needed-to-colonoscope to prevent a death over the lifetime of a cohort in the current NBCSP is 35 to 49. Starting screening at 45 years would increase colonoscopy demand for program-related colonoscopies by 3% to 14% and be associated with 55 to 170 additional colonoscopies per additional death prevented. Starting screening at 45 years could be cost-effective, but it would increase colonoscopy demand and would be associated with a less favorable incremental benefits-to-harms trade-off than screening from 50 to 74 years. The study underpins recently updated Australian colorectal cancer management guidelines that recommend that the NBCSP continues to offer bowel screening from 50 to 74 years.

Wendy Atkin: epidemiologist who made an enormous contribution to bowel cancer prevention

Julian Nieman In October 2010, despite an atmosphere of cuts and austerity, Prime Minister David Cameron pledged £60m to incorporate flexible sigmoidoscopy into the NHS bowel screening programme. This followed...

A Whole-Organisation Approach to Increasing Bowel Screening Participation Rates

Background and context: Australia has one of the highest rates of bowel cancer in the world, yet if detected early more than 90% of cases can be successfully treated. The Australian government's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) send a free at-home iFOBT to all eligible people aged 50-74. Current uptake of the program is low (∼40%). Increasing bowel screening is a key focus of Cancer Council Victoria's (CCV) strategic plan (2017-2021). Aim: CCV aims to increase NBCSP participation rates in the state of Victoria, Australia to 50% by 2021. Strategy/Tactics: In 2017, CCV implemented its first ever television-led bowel screening campaign. A whole-organization approach was adopted to develop, implement and evaluate the campaign. Program/Policy process: A whole-organization approach included working with CCVs behavioral researchers to understand barriers and motivating factors to screen, collaboration with the epidemiology center to identify evidence to target campaign delivery, stakeholder liaison with clinicians engaged with the organization, engagement with the organization's support services to respond to calls as a result of the campaign, working with the fundraising team to develop strategies to engage supporters, and leveraging our flagship Daffodil Day initiative with a focus on bowel cancer. Outcomes: Adopting a whole-organization approach enabled all facets of the organization to be involved in a common goal. This resulted in shared ownership of campaign deliverables, greater engagement of staff across the organization in bowel screening and the identification of innovative strategies that wouldn't have been possible had this approach not been adopted. Importantly, CCV’s campaign led to greater numbers of eligible people participating in bowel screening. What was learned: The identification of bowel screening as a CCV priority was critical for enabling cross-organizational collaboration. Taking a whole-organization approach resulted in the identification of existing programs and services to leverage the campaign, strengthening its reach and overall impact.

More Robust Monitoring for Continuous Quality Improvement in Screening Programmes

Background and context: The National Screening Unit in the Ministry of Health is responsible for the safety, effectiveness, and quality of five formal screening programs in New Zealand: breast screening, cervical screening, bowel screening, newborn metabolic screening, and newborn hearing screening. Currently, each screening program has a set of standards against which performance is assessed. Each program is monitored through a range of avenues: formally reported indicators, audits, contract reporting, case reviews, etc. Aim: We aimed to review the existing monitoring across all the screening programs to: (a) Clarify what existing measures served what purpose, and for which audience (b) Review what was being captured through different monitoring avenues, to assess gaps and duplications (c) To better align our monitoring approach across all the screening programs. Strategy/Tactics: For each measure, we used a formal template to justify its existence, covering multiple aspects including rationale, lifespan, dimension of quality, screening pathway step, targets and associated evidence, thresholds for corrective action, and “owner” responsible for triggering quality improvement. We also mapped the screening program standards to various monitoring avenues to assess gaps and duplications. Program/Policy process: This process was timed to coincide with the need for developing monitoring for a new screening program (bowel screening), and revising monitoring for an established screening program undergoing a change (cervical screening switching to HPV testing as a primary screen). Outcomes: *anticipated outcomes in italics, will be completed by time of Congress* This process resulted in an overarching monitoring framework, which functions as a blueprint for screening-program-specific monitoring plans. What was learned: Screening programs have different monitoring requirements depending on what phase they are in (i.e., new versus changing versus established). Having clearly documented rationale ensures that every measure is justified and has an “evidence trail”. Having clearly documented audiences, thresholds and responsibilities for corrective action ensures that monitoring contributes to continuous quality improvement, rather than monitoring for monitoring's sake.

Strategies for Increasing Participation in Mail-out Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Population mail-out bowel screening programs are a convenient, cost-effective and sensitive method of detecting colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite increased survival rates associated with early detection of CRC, in many countries 50% or more of eligible individuals do not participate in such programs, resulting in a substantial amount of cancers progressing undetected and wasted public health resources. Aim: The current study aimed to systematically review all of the interventions that have been applied internationally to increase fecal occult blood test (FOBT) kit return, specifically in population mail-out programs, to make recommendations to policy makers and program organizers as to the most effective methods of increasing uptake. Method: Six electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, InformIT, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses) were searched for articles published in English before 10th of March 2018. Studies were included if they reported the results of an intervention designed to increase the return of FOBT kits that had been mailed to individuals' homes. Results: PRISMA systematic review reporting methods were applied and each study was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE guidelines. The review identified 53 interventions from 30 published studies. Nine distinct intervention strategy types were identified and pooled risk ratios and confidence intervals were estimated for each intervention type. Four key effective intervention strategies were identified including telephone contact, GP endorsement, simplified test procedures, and advance notification with small to moderate effect sizes. Conclusions: Interventions that combine program-level changes incorporating the issue of advance notification and alternative screening tools with the involvement of primary health professionals through endorsement letters and telephone contact should lead to increases in kit return in mail-out CRC screening programs. Future research should examine the benefit of combining intervention strategies and tailoring to specific populations.

News

Gastrointestinal NursingVol. 16, No. 7 NewsNewsSue LearnerSue LearnerSearch for more papers by this authorSue LearnerPublished Online:4 Sep 2018https://doi.org/10.12968/gasn.2018.16.7.8AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Ohkuma T, Peters SAE, Woodward M. Sex differences in the association between diabetes and cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 121 cohorts including 20 million individuals and one million events. Diabetologia. 2020; 18(online):1–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-018-4664-5 Google Scholarvan de Wouw M, Boehme M, Lyte JM et al.. Short-chain fatty acids: microbial metabolites that alleviate stress-induced brain-gut axis alterations. J Physiol. 2018 (online). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1113/jp276431 Crossref, Google ScholarBrine S. Bowel screening to start at 50. www.gov.uk/government/news/bowel-screening-to-start-at-50 (accessed 13 August 2018) Google ScholarBrown M. Marie Curie tops BBC History poll of women who changed the world. The Guardian. 9 August 2018. https://tinyurl.com/ybhj62z2 (accessed 13 August 2018) Google ScholarPublic Health England. Severe obesity in ten to eleven year olds reaches record high. 2018. https://tinyurl.com/yd8kd3nr (accessed 13 August 2018) Google ScholarStull VJ, Finer E, Bergmans RS et al.. Impact of edible cricket consumption on gut microbiota in healthy adults, a double-blind, randomized crossover trial. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):10762. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29032-2 Crossref, Google ScholarSutaria S, Devakumar D, Yasuda SS et al.. Is obesity associated with depression in children? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Childhood. 2018 (online). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2017-314608 Crossref, Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails 2 September 2018Volume 16Issue 7ISSN (print): 1479-5248ISSN (online): 2052-2835 Metrics History Published online 4 September 2018 Published in print 2 September 2018 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

Screening Women in Glasgow: Comparing uptake across cancer screening programmes at an individual patient level

IntroductionPopulation-based screening has been shown to reduce cancer specific mortality. Within Scotland, three national screening programmes exist: breast, cervical and bowel. Despite being a common and preventable form of cancer, the uptake for bowel cancer screening among women lags behind that for breast and cervical cancer.
 Objectives and ApproachSince the benefits of screening accrue with participation, it is important to understand why differences in screening uptake exist. In this study, data on women aged 24-74 in the Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board, invited to take part in one or more screening programme during the period 2009-2013, were linked to demographic and medical data. Uptake was determined based on the presence of a screening attendance or result; the impact of age, deprivation and co-morbidity on uptake was determined using logistic regression for each individual programme, and for the cohort of women invited to participate in all three programmes.
 ResultsOverall, 430,591 women were invited to take part in one or more screening programme during the study period. The uptake for bowel screening was, at 61.7%, lower than that seen in either the breast (72.6%) or cervical (80.7%) programme. Despite these differences, the same demographic factors were associated with uptake of each individual screening programme: older women and those living in affluent areas were most likely to attend. Medical factors did differentially influence uptake, those with multi-morbid illness being less likely to participate in breast and bowel, but not the cervical programme. For the 68,324 women invited to participate in all programmes, 52.1% took part in all three while 7.2% participated in none.
 Conclusion/ImplicationsUptake of bowel screening was confirmed as lower than uptake of other programmes, although all were similarly impacted by demographic, clinical and socioeconomic factors. Individuals were more likely to complete bowel screening if they participate in another programme, suggesting these may serve as a vehicle for improving bowel screening uptake.

Development of an evidence-based brief \u2018talking\u2019 intervention for non-responders to bowel screening for use in primary care: stakeholder interviews

BackgroundBowel cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Bowel screening has been shown to reduce mortality and primary care interventions have been successful in increasing uptake of screening. Using evidence-based theory to inform the development of such interventions has been shown to increase their effectiveness. This study aimed to develop and refine a brief evidence-based intervention for eligible individuals whom have not responded to their last bowel screening invitation (non-responders), for opportunistic use by primary care providers during routine consultations.MethodsThe development of a brief intervention involving a conversation between primary care providers and non-responders was informed by a multi-faceted model comprising: research team workshop and meetings to draw on expertise; evidence from the literature regarding barriers to bowel screening and effective strategies to promote informed participation; relevant psychological theory, and intervention development and behaviour change guidance. Qualitative telephone interviews with 1) bowel screening stakeholders and 2) patient non-responders explored views regarding the acceptability of the intervention to help refine its content and process.ResultsThe intervention provides a theory and evidence-based tool designed to be incorporated within current primary care practice. Bowel screening stakeholders were supportive of the intervention and recognised the importance of the role of primary care. Interviews highlighted the importance of brevity and simplicity to incorporate the intervention into routine clinical care. Non-responders similarly found the intervention acceptable, valuing a holistic approach to their care. Moreover, they expected their primary care provider to encourage participation.ConclusionsA theory-based brief conversation for use in a primary care consultation was acceptable to bowel screening stakeholders and potential recipients, reflecting a health promoting primary care ethos. Findings indicate that it is appropriate to test the intervention in primary care in a feasibility study.

Scottish Bowel Screening Programme colonoscopy quality - scope for improvement?

The delivery of the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (SBoSP) is rooted in the provision of a high quality, effective and participant-centred service. Safe and effective colonoscopy forms an integral part of the process. Additional accreditation as part of a multi-faceted programme for participating colonoscopists, as in England, does not exist in Scotland. This study aimed to describe the quality of colonoscopy in the SBoSP and compare this to the English national screening standards. Data were collected from the SBoSP between 2007 and 2014. End-points for analysis were caecal intubation, cancer, polyp and adenoma detection, and complications. Overall results were compared with 2012 published English national standards for screening and outcomes from 2006 to 2009. During the study period 53 332 participants attended for colonoscopy. The colonoscopy completion rate was 95.6% overall. The mean cancer detection rate was 7.1%, the polyp detection rate was 45.7% and the adenoma detection rate was 35.5%. The overall complication rate was 0.47%. Colonoscopy quality in the SBoSP has exceeded the standard set for screening colonoscopy in England, despite not adopting a multi-faceted programme for screening colonoscopy. However, the overall adenoma detection rate in Scotland was 9.1% lower than that in England which has implications for colonoscopy quality and may have an impact on cancer prevention rates, a key aim of the SBoSP.

Emotional predictors of bowel screening: the avoidance-promoting role of fear, embarrassment, and disgust

BackgroundDespite considerable efforts to address practical barriers, colorectal cancer screening numbers are often low. People do not always act rationally, and investigating emotions may offer insight into the avoidance of screening. The current work assessed whether fear, embarrassment, and disgust predicted colorectal cancer screening avoidance.MethodsA community sample (N = 306) aged 45+ completed a questionnaire assessing colorectal cancer screening history and the extent that perceptions of cancer risk, colorectal cancer knowledge, doctor discussions, and a specifically developed scale, the Emotional Barriers to Bowel Screening (EBBS), were associated with previous screening behaviours and anticipated bowel health decision-making.ResultsStep-wise logistic regression models revealed that a decision to delay seeking healthcare in the hypothetical presence of bowel symptoms was less likely in people who had discussed risk with their doctor, whereas greater colorectal cancer knowledge and greater fear of a negative outcome predicted greater likelihood of delay. Having previously provided a faecal sample was predicted by discussions about risk with a doctor, older age, and greater embarrassment, whereas perceptions of lower risk predicted a lower likelihood. Likewise, greater insertion disgust predicted a lower likelihood of having had an invasive bowel screening test in the previous 5 years.ConclusionsAlongside medical and demographic factors, fear, embarrassment and disgust are worthy of consideration in colorectal cancer screening. Understanding how specific emotions impact screening decisions and behaviour is an important direction for future work and has potential to inform screening development and communications in bowel health.

Screening for colorectal cancer in defunctioned colons.

Population-based colorectal (bowel) cancer screening using faecal occult blood tests leads to a reduction in cause-specific mortality. However, in people where the colon is defunctioned, the use of standard faecal occult blood test is not appropriate. The aim of this study was to examine the current trends of clinical practice for colorectal cancer screening in people with defunctioned colons. An online survey was performed using SurveyMonkey. All members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland were invited by email to participate. Reminders were sent to non-responders and partial responders till six weeks. All responses were included in our analysis. Of the 206 (34.59%) questionnaires completed, all questions were answered in 110 (55.8%). Among responders, 94 (85.4%) were colorectal consultant surgeons, 72% had worked in their current capacity for more than five years, and 105 (50.9%) had encountered colorectal cancer in defunctioned colons during their career. Some 72.2% of responders stated that a screening test for colorectal cancer in patients with defunctioned colons was currently not offered, or that they did not know whether or not it was offered in their area. Bowel screening in the United Kingdom is currently not offered to 72.2% of the age appropriate population with defunctioned colons. Among responding colorectal surgeons, 50% had encountered colorectal cancer in such patients. There is considerable variability in clinical practice regarding the optimal age for onset of screening, time interval, and the optimal modality to offer for screening in such cases.