Year 2016 / Volume 108 / Number 6
Original
Effectiveness of three interventions to improve participation in colorectal cancer screening

315-322

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4048/2015

Jesús López-Torres Hidalgo, Joseba Rabanales Sotos, María José Simarro Herráez, Jaime López-Torres López, Monchi Campos Rosa, María Ángeles López Verdejo,

Abstract
Background and objective: Participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening varies widely among different countries and different socio-demographic groups. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of three primary-care interventions to increase CRC screening participation among persons over the age of 50 years and to identify the health and socio-demographic-related factors that determine greater participation. Methods: We conducted a randomized experimental study with only one post-test control group. A total of 1,690 subjects were randomly distributed into four groups: written briefing; telephone briefing; an invitation to attend a group meeting; and no briefing. Subjects were evaluated 2 years post-intervention, with the outcome variable being participation in CRC screening. Results: A total of 1,129 subjects were interviewed. Within the groups, homogeneity was tested in terms of socio-demographic characteristics and health-related variables. The proportion of subjects who participated in screening was: 15.4% in the written information group (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.2-19.7); 28.8% in the telephone information group (95% CI: 23.6-33.9); 8.1% in the face-to-face information group (95% CI: 4.5-11.7); and 5.9% in the control group (95% CI: 2.9-9.0), with this difference proving statistically significant (p < 0.001). Logistic regression showed that only interventions based on written or telephone briefing were effective. Apart from type of intervention, number of reported health problems and place of residence remained in the regression model. Conclusions: Both written and telephone information can serve to improve participation in CRC screening. This preventive activity could be optimized by means of simple interventions coming within the scope of primary health-care professionals.
Share Button
New comment
Comments
No comments for this article
References
1. Marzo-Castillejo M, Mascort Roca J, Pastor Rodríguez-Moñino A, et al. ¿Estamos convencidos de nuestro papel en la prevención y detección precoz del cáncer colorrectal? Aten Primaria 2012;44:303-5.
2. Andreu García M, Marzo M, Mascort J, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;32:137-9.
3. Pignone M, Rich M, Teutsch SM, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk; A summary of the evidence. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:132-41.
4. Spruce LR, Sanford JT. An intervention to change the approach to colorectal cancer screening in primary care. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 2012;24:167-74.
5. Short MW, Layton MC, Teer BN, et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Am Fam Physician 2015;91:93-100.
6. Benton SC, Seaman HE, Halloran SP. Faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening: the past or the future. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2015;17:428.
7. Estrategia en Cáncer del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social. Plan de Calidad para el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social; 2010.
8. Salas D. Colorectal cancer screening: foundations for making progress in screening in Spain. Gac Sanit 2011;25:329-30
9. Morillas JD, Castells A, Oriol I, et al. Alianza para la Prevención del Cáncer de Colon en España: un compromiso cívico con la sociedad. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;35:109‑28.
10. Bellas Beceiro B, Ferrándiz Santos J, Mascort Roca JJ, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for prevention of colorectal cancer: towards an integral, integrated and coordinated approach. Aten Primaria 2004;34:451-3.
11. Hulscher ME, Wensing M, van Der Weijden T, et al. Interventions to implement prevention in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;(1):CD000362.
12. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83.
13. EuroQol group. EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199-208.
14. Cabrera E, Zabalegui A, Blanco I. Spanish version of the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS). Cross cultural adaptation and validity and reliability analysis. Med Clin (Barc) 2011;136:8-12.
15. Gale CR, Deary IJ, Wardle J, et al. Cognitive ability and personality as predictors of participation in a national colorectal cancer screening programme: the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. J Epidemiol Community Health 2015;69.530-5.
16. Molina-Barceló A, Salas-Trejo D, Peiró-Pérez R, et al. Reasons for participating in the Valencian Community Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme by gender, age, and social class. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2014;106:439-47.
17. Javadzade SH, Reisi M, Mostafavi F, et al. Barriers related to fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening in moderate risk individuals. J Educ Health Promot 2014;3:120.
18. López-Torres Hidalgo J, Simarro Herráez MJ, Rabanales Sotos J, et al. The attitudes of primary care providers towards screening for colorectal cancer. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2013;105:272-8.
19. Larkey LK, McClain D, Roe DJ, et al. Randomized Controlled Trial of Storytelling Compared to a Personal Risk Tool Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening in Low-Income Patients. Am J Health Promot 2015;30:e59-70.
20. Decker KM, Singh H. Reducing inequities in colorectal cancer screening in North America. J Carcinog 2014;13:12.
21. Resnicow K, Zhou Y, Hawley S, et al. Communication preference moderates the effect of a tailored intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among African Americans. Patient Educ Couns 2014;97:370-5.
22. Lee HY, Tran M, Jin SW, et al. Motivating underserved Vietnamese Americans to obtain colorectal cancer screening: evaluation of a culturally tailored DVD intervention. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:1791-6.
23. Lairson DR, Dicarlo M, Deshmuk AA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a standard intervention versus a navigated intervention on colorectal cancer screening use in primary care. Cancer 2014;120:1042-9.
24. Green BB, Wang CY, Anderson ML, et al. An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2013;158:301-11.
25. Myers RE, Bittner-Fagan H, Daskalakis C, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a tailored navigation and a standard intervention in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013;22:109-17.
26. Fiscella K, Humiston S, Hendren S, et al. A multimodal intervention to promote mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a safety-net practice. J Natl Med Assoc 2011;103:762-8.
27. Lasser KE, Murillo J, Medlin E, et al. A multilevel intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among community health center patients: results of a pilot study. BMC Fam Pract 2009;10:37.
28. Shankaran V, McKoy JM, Dandade N, et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness of a low-intensity patient-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5248-53.
29. Tu SP, Chun A, Yasui Y, et al. Adaptation of an evidence-based intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening: a quasi-experimental study. Implement Sci 2014;9:85.
30. Aragones A, Schwartz MD, Shah NR, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a multilevel intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among Latino immigrants in a primary care facility. J Gen Intern Med 2010;25:564-7.
31. McFall AM, Ryan JE, Hager P. Implementing a client reminder intervention for colorectal cancer screening at a health insurance worksite. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;11:E20. DOI: 10.5888/pcd11.130276
32. Baker DW, Brown T, Buchanan DR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve adherence to annual colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1235-41.
33. Carney PA, Lee-Lin F, Mongoue-Tchokote S, et al. Improving colorectal cancer screening in Asian Americans: Results of a randomized intervention study. Cancer 2014;120:1702-12.
34. Leone LA, Reuland DS, Lewis CL, et al. Reach, usage, and effectiveness of a Medicaid patient navigator intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening, Cape Fear, North Carolina, 2011. Prev Chronic Dis 2013;10:E82.
35. Powe BD, Faulkenberry R, Harmond L. A review of intervention studies that seek to increase colorectal cancer screening among African-Americans. Am J Health Promot 2010;25:92-9.
Related articles

Digestive Diseases Image

Spontaneous regression of a rectal cancer

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9486/2023

Letter

Vaginal lesion as first manifestation of colorectal disease

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.9270/2022

Review

Inflammatory bowel disease and solid organ transplantation

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7361/2020

Review

New non-invasive biomarkers for colorectal cancer screening

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7233/2020

Letter

Medullary colorectal carcinoma. Do we really know it?

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.6728/2019

Letter

The rectosigmoid junction: are limits important?

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2019.5983/2018

Editorial

Colorectal cancer screening and survival

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5870/2018

Letter to the Editor

Liver metastasis from colorectal cancer 12 years after liver transplantation

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4507/2016

Review

Serrated lesions and serrated polyposis syndrome

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4065/2015

Letter to the Editor

Endobronchial metastases of colorectal cancer

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4080/2015

Citation tools
López-Torres Hidalgo J, Rabanales Sotos J, Simarro Herráez M, López-Torres López J, Campos Rosa M, López Verdejo M, et all. Effectiveness of three interventions to improve participation in colorectal cancer screening. 4048/2015


Download to a citation manager

Download the citation for this article by clicking on one of the following citation managers:

Metrics
This article has received 1031 visits.
This article has been downloaded 97 times.

Statistics from Dimensions


Statistics from Plum Analytics

Publication history

Received: 14/10/2015

Accepted: 04/04/2016

Online First: 08/04/2016

Published: 03/06/2016

Article revision time: 167 days

Article Online First time: 177 days

Article editing time: 233 days


Share
This article hasn't been rated yet.
Reader rating:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology is the official organ of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva and the Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Cookie policy Privacy Policy Legal Notice © Copyright 2023 y Creative Commons. The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology