Background-Barriers experienced by patients influence the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior research has quantified how often patients encounter these challenges but has generally not revealed their complex perspective and experience with barriers.
Project Northland was a randomized trial to reduce alcohol use among adolescents in 24 school districts in northeastern Minnesota. Phase 1 (1991-1994), when the targeted cohort was in grades 6-8, included school curricula, parent involvement, peer leadership and community task forces. The Interim Phase (1994-1996) involved minimal intervention. Phase 2 (1996-1998), when the cohort was in grades 11 and 12, included a classroom curriculum, parent education, print media, youth development and community organizing. Outcomes of these interventions were assessed by annual student surveys from 1991 to 1998, alcohol purchase attempts by young-looking buyers in 1991, 1994 and 1998, and parent telephone surveys in 1996 and 1998. Growth curve analysis was used to examine the student survey data over time. Project Northland was most successful when the students were young adolescents. The lack of intervention in the Interim Phase when the students were in grades 9 and 10 had a significant and negative impact on alcohol use. The intervention used with the high school students as those in grades 11 and 12 made a positive impact on their tendency to use alcohol use, binge drinking and ability to obtain alcohol. There was no impact in Phase 2 on other student-level behavioral and psychosocial factors. Developmentally appropriate, multi-component, community-wide programs throughout adolescence appear to be needed to reduce alcohol use.
Background
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are suboptimal. The most important barriers identified by patients are poorly understood. A comprehensive assessment of barriers to all recommended modalities is needed.
Methods
In 2007, a questionnaire was mailed to 6,100 patients, aged 50–75 years, from 12 family medicine practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network. People aged 65–75 years and African Americans were oversampled. Patients were asked to rate 19–21 barriers to each of four recommended tests. In 2008, responses were coded on a 5-point scale; higher scores reflected stronger barrier endorsement.
Results
The response rate was 55% (n=3,357). Approximately 40% of respondents were aged ≥65 years, 30% were African-American, and 73% were adherent to screening. A clinician's failure to suggest screening and not knowing testing was necessary received the highest mean scores as barriers. Financial concerns and misconceptions were also cited. Barrier scores differed depending on whether respondents were never-screened, overdue for screening, or adherent to guidelines. The top five barriers for each modality included test-specific barriers (e.g., handling stool, bowel preparation), which often outranked generic barriers to screening. Not knowing testing was necessary was a top barrier for all tests but colonoscopy.
Conclusions
Although physician advice and awareness of the need for screening are important, barriers to screening are not homogenous across tests, and test-specific barriers warrant consideration in designing strategies to improve screening rates. Barrier scores differ by screening status, highlighting the need to address prior screening experience. Evidence that patients are more familiar with colonoscopy than with other modalities suggests an opportunity to improve screening rates by educating patients about alternative tests.
Direct mailing of FOBT kits combined with follow-up reminders promotes more rapid increases in the use of FOBT and nearly doubles the increase in overall rate of adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines in a general population compared with a community-wide screening promotion and awareness campaign.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.