Non-participants In Colorectal Cancer Screening Research Articles

"Rescue" of Nonparticipants in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Three Noninvasive Test Options.

Few studies have directly targeted nonparticipants in colorectal cancer screening to identify effective engagement strategies. We undertook a randomized controlled trial that targeted nonparticipants in a previous trial of average-risk subjects which compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, a blood test or a choice of either. Nonparticipants (n = 899) were randomized to be offered a kit containing a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), directions on how to arrange a blood DNA test, or the option of doing either. Screening participation was assessed 12 weeks after the offer. To assess the cognitive and attitudinal variables related to participation and invitee choice, invitees were surveyed after 12 weeks, and associations were investigated using multinomial logistic regression. Participation rates were similar between groups (P = 0.88): 12.0% for FIT (35/292), 13.3% for the blood test (39/293), and 13.4% for choice (39/290). Within the choice group, participation was significantly higher with FIT (9.7%, 28/290) compared with the blood test (3.8%, 11/290, P = 0.005). The only variable significantly associated with participation was socioeconomic status when offered FIT, and age when offered choice but there was none when offered the blood test. Survey respondents indicated that convenience, time-saving, comfort, and familiarity were major influences on participation. There was no clear advantage between a fecal test, blood test, or choice of test although, when given a choice, the fecal test was preferred. Differences in variables associated with participation according to invitation strategy warrant consideration when deciding upon an invitation strategy for screening nonparticipants. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This trial of screening for those at average risk for colorectal cancer targeted past fecal-test nonparticipants and compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, blood test, or choice of either. Although there was no clear advantage between strategies, factors associated with participation differed between each strategy.

Effectiveness of a decision aid for colorectal cancer screening on components of informed choice according to educational attainment: A randomised controlled trial.

BackgroundThe decision to take up colorectal cancer screening has to be made on informed grounds balancing benefits and harms. Self-administered decision aids can support citizens in making an informed choice. A self-administered web-based decision aid targeting citizens with lower educational attainment has been evaluated within the target population. However, the effectiveness in the general screening population remains unexplored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for colorectal cancer screening on components of informed choice among previous non-participants in colorectal cancer screening.Methods and findingsThe study was designed as a parallel randomised controlled trial among non-participants in colorectal cancer screening in Central Denmark Region (men and women aged 53–74 years). Respondents to baseline and follow-up questionnaires comprised the study population (n = 1,723). The intervention group received the decision aid electronically along with the second reminder. The control group received only the second reminder. The main outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, uptake and decisional conflict) were obtained through questionnaires data and from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database.The decision aid increased the uptake rate by 8 percentage points (95% CI: 3.4;12.6) but had no effect on either knowledge (scale score differences: 0.09; 95% CI: -0.05;0.24) or attitudes (0.45; 95% CI: -0.00;0.91). Decisional conflict decreased by 1.69 scale points (95% CI: -3.18;-0.20). The effect was similar across educational attainment levels.ConclusionsThe web-based decision aid offers a feasible way to provide individualised screening information in a "one size fits all" approach that may hold the potential to increase informed CRC screening uptake.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03253888.

Uptake of a colorectal cancer screening blood test in people with elevated risk for cancer who cannot or will not complete a faecal occult blood test.

Participation rates in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are low. Nonparticipation is commonly attributed to psychosocial factors, but some medical conditions also prevent screening. These barriers might be partially overcome if a blood test for CRC screening was available. This study determined whether people who had always declined screening by FOBT would participate if offered a blood test. An audit of registrants within a personalized CRC screening programme was undertaken to determine the reasons for regular nonparticipation in FOBT. Consistent nonparticipants (n=240) were randomly selected and invited for CRC screening with a blood test. Demographic characteristics and the reasons for prior FOBT nonparticipation were collected by means of a questionnaire. Nonparticipation in the screening programme could be classified as either behavioural (8.6%), with consistent noncompliance, or due to medical contraindications (8.5%), which included chronic rectal bleeding, being deemed unsuitable by a health professional, and needing personal assistance. Blood test uptake was 25%, with participation in the medical contraindications group greater than that in the behavioural group (43 vs. 12%, P<0.001). Reported behavioural reasons for nonparticipation in faecal immunochemical test included procrastination and dislike of the test, but these were not associated with blood test uptake (P>0.05). There is a subgroup of the community who have medical reasons for nonparticipation in CRC screening with FOBT but will participate if offered a blood test. The option of a blood test does not, however, improve uptake in those who admit to behavioural reasons for noncompliance with screening.

Determinants of non-participation in a mass screening program for colorectal cancer in Finland

Background: For an effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, high participation rate is essential. However, non-participation in CRC screening program has increased in Finland.Material and methods: The study was based on a population-based nationwide cohort of persons invited for CRC screening in 2004–2011. Information on the first round of the CRC screening participation and related background factors was obtained from the Finnish Cancer Registry, and information about health behavior factors from the Health Behavior Survey (HBS) in 1978–1999. Non-participation in CRC screening was analyzed with Poisson regression as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).Results: Of all persons invited for CRC screening (79 871 men and 80 891 women) 35% of men and 21% of women refused. Of those invited for screening, 2456 men (3.1%) and 2507 women (3.1%) were also invited to the HBS. Persons, who declined HBS, were also more likely to refuse CRC screening (men IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.26–1.56, women 1.75, 1.52–2.02) compared to HBS participants. Never married persons had about a 75% higher risk for refusing than married ones. The youngest age group (60 years) was more likely to refuse screening than the older age groups (62 or >64 years). Smoking was associated with non-participation in screening (current smokers, men: IRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05–1.67, women: 2.10, 1.61–2.73).Conclusions: Participation in CRC screening was affected by gender, age, and marital status. Persons, who refused the HBS, were also more likely to refuse CRC screening. Smoking was a risk factor for non-participation in CRC screening.

Reasons for Participation and Nonparticipation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Trial of Colonoscopy and CT Colonography

We compared reported reasons for participation and nonparticipation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening between colonoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) colonography in a randomized controlled trial. We randomly invited 8,844 people for screening by colonoscopy or CT colonography. On a questionnaire, invitees indicated reasons for participation or nonparticipation and indicated the most decisive reason. The most frequently cited reasons to accept screening were early detection of precursor lesions and CRC, and contribution to science. The most frequently cited reasons to decline were the unpleasantness of the examination, the inconvenience of the preparation, a lack of symptoms, and "no time/too much effort." Among colonoscopy nonparticipants, elderly invitees cited inconvenience less often, and absence of symptoms more often, than did the group overall. The reason reported most frequently as the most decisive reason not to participate was the unpleasantness of the examination among colonoscopy nonparticipants, and "no time/too much effort" and lack of symptoms among CT colonography nonparticipants. In light of these results, future screening programs could tailor the information provided to invitees.

Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening in a population-based study: the impact of gender, health care source, and time

Introduction. The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in reducing incident colorectal cancer and the risk of death has been shown. Despite campaigns to promote the benefits of and use of colorectal cancer screening, most people are not participating in screening. In this paper, we examine factors associated with screening behavior over time, by health care provider, and by gender and report associations between screening and development of colorectal cancer after adjusting for diet and lifestyle factors. Methods. Data from two population-based case-control studies of colorectal cancer were used to examine risk associations with nonparticipation in colorectal cancer screening. Study participants were identified for the first study between 1991 and 1994 ( N = 1,346 cases and 1,544 controls) and for the second between 1997 and 2001 ( N = 952 cases and 1,205 controls) and were asked to complete a detailed in-person interviewer-administered diet and lifestyle questionnaire. The control population is used to examine changes in screening behavior and associations with screening over time. Results. Significantly, fewer people reported fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in 1997–2001 than in 1991–1994 (62.5% in 1991–1994 vs. 47.2% in 1997–2001); a slight nonsignificant increase in sigmoidoscopy screening was reported for these periods among controls (33.9% vs. 36.6%). In the control population, during these periods, there was a statistically significant increase in the number of people who reported having had a sigmoidoscopy for screening rather than for problems (72.6% in 1997–2001 vs. 63.8% in 1991–1994). There were differences in factors associated with screening behavior by time, by sex, and by health care provider, although having a family history of colorectal cancer, having more education, and being male was associated with more screening in all settings. After adjusting for diet and lifestyle factors, we observed that non-sigmoidoscopy screening significantly influenced risk of incident cancer (rectal OR: 2.9; 95% CI, 2.3–3.7; distal tumor OR: 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4–2.3); proximal tumor: 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1–1.8). Nonuse of FOBT also was associated significantly with tumors in the rectal (OR: 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3–1.9) and distal (OR: 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1–1.8) sites. Summary. These data reinforce the importance of screening to reduce risk of colorectal cancer development. However, flexible sigmoidoscopy screening is increasing only modestly over time, and primarily in settings where a significant investment in screening has been made. FOBT screening, which is effective for rectal cancer prevention, is actually decreasing.