Barriers to home bowel cancer screening

Goodwin, Belinda C.; Myers, Larry L.; Ireland, Michael; March, Sonja; Ralph, Nicholas; Dunn, Jeff; Chambers, Suzanne K.; Aitken, Joanne F.

doi:10.1002/pon.5741

Cited by 16 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants (n = 25) were NBCSP recipients recruited through several mechanisms including an online survey about bowel cancer screening 8 as well as invitations to professional, community and personal networks through social media and email. Examples of groups approached include local community noticeboard Facebook groups, bowling, golf and surf clubs in Queensland, Australia, and university staff forums.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives

Goodwin¹,

Viljoen²,

Myers³

et al. 2022

Public Health Res Pract.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Despite the widely publicised health benefits of participation in bowel cancer screening, only 43.5% of recipients participate in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Through consultation with kit recipients, this study aimed to identify features of home bowel screening kits that could be modified to increase their use.Method: Participants (n = 25) were presented with nine different bowel cancer screening kits and asked to identify features of each kit that might prevent or promote their use. Responses were coded using content analysis, and a narrative synthesis is presented summarising preferences relating to each element of the kit.Results: Six modifiable elements were identified: collection tool, collection sheet, specimen container, instruction, packaging and processes. Participant preferences were for collection devices that limited the users' proximity to faecal matter, smaller packaging, simpler processes and step-by-step pictorial instructions. Responses regarding aesthetics, the amount of information included and receiving immediate results were mixed. Conclusions:Findings provide several consumer-driven recommendations, which are to be tested in future research aimed at improving the acceptability and usability of kits distributed in population bowel cancer screening programs.

show abstract

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives

Goodwin¹,

Viljoen²,

Myers³

et al. 2022

Public Health Res Pract.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research suggests that barriers to screening do not tend to differ according to SES, however, screening rates tend to be lower in low SES groups 5,35 . For this reason, caution must be applied in generalising results and further research is needed in this subpopulation 5,34,35 . Finally, response to the actions taken by NBCSP invitees upon the kit's arrival was retrospective and recall errors are possible, lowering response accuracy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This research recruited a large sample, and the effects were consistent across three separate recruitment groups giving greater confidence in the generalisability and replicability of the findings. This sampling procedure also allowed for a large sample of non‐completers to be included in the analysis, including those who showed no intention to participate in the FOBT screening process, a subset of people that are harder to recruit into health surveys 34 . This study was also representative of NBCSP invitees in Australia in terms of remoteness status living in different areas of remoteness 5…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This sampling procedure also allowed for a large sample of non-completers to be included in the analysis, including those who showed no intention to participate in the FOBT screening process, a subset of people that are harder to recruit into health surveys. 34 This study was also representative of NBCSP invitees in Australia in terms of remoteness status living in different areas of remoteness. 5…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5,35 For this reason, caution must be applied in generalising results and further research is needed in this subpopulation. 5,34,35 Finally, response to the actions taken by NBCSP invitees upon the kit's arrival was retrospective and recall errors are possible, lowering response accuracy.…”

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mail‐out bowel cancer screening: Identifying the behavioural stumbling blocks

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe the actions taken by recipients of mail-out faecal occult blood test (FOBT) kits and to identify the points at which progress towards kit completion typically stops. Differences according to gender, age, and screening intention were also examined.Methods: 1599 people completed an online survey identifying the actions they took upon receiving an FOBT kit. Latent class analysis was conducted to identify latent subgroups of participants that reported similar actions. Differences between gender, age, and intention status were assessed using non-invariance testing.Results: Four latent subgroups of FOBT invitees were identified: those who complete and return their FOBT kit ('completers'); those who bring the kit into their house but go no further ('ignorers'); those who open the package and read the bowel cancer information materials but go no further ('readers'); and those who read the instructions but do not place the kit near the toilet and do not complete their FOBT kit ('leavers'). Non-completers who intended to use the kit were most likely to be in the 'leavers' class, while those who had no intention were most likely to be in the 'readers' class.Conclusions: Distinct subgroups of non-responders exist among bowel cancer screening invitees, suggesting different behaviour change interventions are needed to facilitate participation. Some invitees, especially those with high participatory intention, are likely to benefit from prompts to take the kit into the toilet, while others, with little participatory intention, often read the invitation materials presenting an opportunity to intervene with health messages.

show abstract

The role of need for control and self‐reliance in gender and age differences in bowel cancer screening participation

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To examine the relationships between need for control and self-reliance and barriers to bowel cancer screening to better understand the reasons for lower bowel cancer screening adherence in males and younger individuals.Methods: Participants (n = 506) aged between 54 and 75 years old completed an online survey measuring demographic information, the four-factor Barriers to Home Bowel Cancer Screening Scale (BB-CanS) and a measure of Need for Control and Self-Reliance (NCSR). Model fit statistics were compared for seven path models testing the relationships between NCSR and BB-CanS factors and the moderating and mediating effects of age and gender.Results: Models where age and gender were included as moderators showed the best fit. When compared to females and those under 60 years of age, stronger positive associations between NCSR and BB-CanS factors were evident among males (β avoidance = 0.539, p < 0.001); β disgust = 0.558, p < 0.001; β difficulty = 0.489, p < 0.001; β autonomy = 0.619, p = 0.002) and those over 60 years of age (β avoidance = 0.400, p < 0.001); β disgust = 0.462, p < 0.001; β difficulty = 0.447, p < 0.001; β autonomy = 0.378, p < 0.001. Conclusions:When encouraging males and people aged 60 years and over to participate in bowel cancer screening, public health messages may benefit from conveying preventative health behaviour and cancer screening participation as actions that reflect self-control and self-reliance.

show abstract

Barriers to home bowel cancer screening

Cited by 16 publications

References 29 publications

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives

Mail‐out bowel cancer screening: Identifying the behavioural stumbling blocks

The role of need for control and self‐reliance in gender and age differences in bowel cancer screening participation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About