Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer risk factors, screening, and associated factors in advanced colorectal cancer patients: a multicenter cross-sectional study in China

Xu, Huifang; Gu, Xiao-Fen; Wang, Xiaohui; Wang, Wenjun; Du, Lingbin; Duan, Shuang-Xia; Liu, Yin; Zhang, Xi; Zhao, Yuqian; Ma, Li; Liu, Yunyong; Huang, Juan-Xiu; Cao, Ji; Fan, Yihang; Li, Li; Feng, Chang-Yan; Lian, Xuemei; Du, Jing-Chang; Zhang, Jian-Gong; Yu, Yan-Qin; Qiao, You‐Lin

doi:10.21037/atm-22-1019

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the study of Oh et al (2021), 71% of the participants heard about FOBT, and 84% heard about colonoscopy [36]. On the other hand, Xu et al (2022) found that 84.9% of the patients with CRC did not have information about screenings and CRC before being diagnosed [37]. In addition, the sources of information of those who had knowledge in the same study were mostly family and friends who had diagnosed with cancer, social media, and television, followed by community education [37].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, Xu et al (2022) found that 84.9% of the patients with CRC did not have information about screenings and CRC before being diagnosed [37]. In addition, the sources of information of those who had knowledge in the same study were mostly family and friends who had diagnosed with cancer, social media, and television, followed by community education [37]. A high level of knowledge and awareness about scans are important factors that drive individuals to have a screening [31,38].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predictors of Stages of Adoption for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Patients in Turkey

Dönmez

TOPTANER

Ata

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are known and recommended for reducing the mortality and morbidity rates from CRC, the adherence rates for the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy are low among adult individuals. Moreover, CRC screening behaviors of primary health care patients remain largely unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine the predictors of stages of adoption for CRC screening in primary health care patients. Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out in primary health care centers with 498 adults between the ages of 50 and 70 years. The data were collected using the “Descriptive Form” and the “Instruments to Measure CRC Screening Benefits and Barriers.” Results The results indicate that colonoscopy was better known compared to FOBT, and information sources of screening tests were mostly relatives and family physicians. Most participants were at the precontemplation stage. Education level, employment status, income level, health status, having a patient diagnosed with CRC in the family, and having information about screening were related to the perception of benefits of having a FOBT and colonoscopy. On the other hand, adherence to colonoscopy, lack of knowledge about screening, and provider recommendation were related to perceived barriers. In addition, perceived benefits and barriers were predictive factors of earlier stages of adoption for FOBT and colonoscopy. Conclusion The results of the study demonstrate that primary care providers have crucial roles for increasing CRC screening in the community. Interventions to improve screening adherence rates should be tailored to individuals in particular stages of adoption for CRC screening.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Stages of Adoption for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Patients in Turkey

Dönmez

TOPTANER

Ata

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, ensuring training on CRC among HCWs improves patient awareness of the screening and in turn may raise demand for screening (Campioni-Norman, 2021;Katsidzira, 2019;Tfaily, 2019). Other studies have reported the importance of recommending the benefits of CRC screening to patients to improve uptake (Al Mutawah, 2018;Soylar, 2019;Carcaise-Edinboro, 2008;Alshammari, 2020), while some also recommend using reminder systems, personalized reminders, doctor validation, using relatives or friends with a history of cancer, television, and community education to increase uptake of CRC screening (Hatamian, 2021;Healthy People, 2019;Kaminski, 2020;Xu, 2022). Focused community awareness programs and CRC prevention and screening policy development are recommended by other studies in developing countries such as Iran and Ethiopia (Alshammari, 2020;Hamza, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Attitude and Practices of Health Care Workers towards Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings in Durban, South Africa: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Magwaza¹,

Hal²,

Hoque³

2023

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: South Africa has the highest number of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in sub-Saharan Africa, with the CRC projected new cases at 8 000 per 100 000 population by 2030. Screening assists with the early detection and control of cancer. This study determined knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) related to CRC among Health Care Workers (HCWs). METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted between April and November 2021 using a self-administered close-ended questionnaire. Data was collected from 109 HCWs in public primary health care facilities in Durban, South Africa. Summary descriptive and association analysis were conducted using IBM SPSS vs. 28. RESULTS: Overall CRC screening knowledge score was 12% (mean 13) with 39% that were familiar with the National Department of Health Cancer Control framework. Only 15% of participants perceived the Perceived the National Cancer Control Guidelines to be influential for the implementation of colorectal cancer screening. 70% of participants would recommend CRC screening to patients. Over one-fifth, (22%) of participants felt that fecal occult blood, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy were effective for CRC screening. Over a third (44%) preferred a structured CRC screening programme. Most participants (81%) were willing to recommend CRC screening to their patients. Only 10% of participants had ever conducted colorectal screening before. The vast majority were unfamiliar with the types of CRC screening tests. Lack of CRC screening guidelines, training, equipment and CRC low burden were identified as barriers to screening. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of HCWs lacked knowledge of the CRC screening programme and its procedures. However, the vast majority of HCWs were willing to conduct screening once trained. This study also highlighted perceived health systems barriers affecting CRC screening. Currently, South Africa does not have national guidelines for CRC screening in South Africa, hence, a national risk differentiation CRC screening guideline is needed to guide implementation at the PHC level. Health systems strengthening interventions, including training of HCWs, availability of screening tests and materials to facilitate the integration of CRC screening noting that PH already implements screening programmes for other cancer types. 

show abstract

“…This is a nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study and the details of the study design have been published ( 18 ). In brief, a multi-stage sampling method was used to identify the 19 tertiary hospitals (10 tertiary cancer hospitals and 9 tertiary general hospitals) in China from March 2020 to March 2021.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As previously described ( 18 ), it was estimated that more than 4445 advanced CRC patients would be enrolled. The total sample size was proportionally allocated to each region according to its population size and based on the estimated sample size, patients should be recruited from each region.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy among patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a nationwide multi-center cross-sectional study

Liu

et al. 2023

Front. Oncol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis cross-sectional study evaluated the involvement of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) in treatment decision-making, assessed the treatment efficacy according to their self-reports, and investigated the influencing factors.MethodsPatients with advanced CRC were recruited from 19 hospitals from March 2020 to March 2021 by a multi-stage multi-level sampling method. A self-designed questionnaire was used to collect demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement of CRC patients in treatment decision-making, treatment methods, and self-reported efficacy. Univariate and unordered multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the factors affecting the involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy.ResultsWe enrolled 4533 patients with advanced CRC. The average age at diagnosis was 58.7 ± 11.8 years. For the treatment method, 32.4% of patients received surgery combined with chemotherapy, 13.1% of patients underwent surgery combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy, and 9.7% of patients were treated with surgery alone. For treatment decision-making, 7.0% of patients were solely responsible for decision-making, 47.0% of patients shared treatment decision-making with family members, 19.0% of patients had family members solely responsible for treatment decision-making, and 27.0% of patients had their physicians solely responsible for treatment decision-making. Gender, age, education level, family income, marital status, treatment cost, hospital type, and treatment method were significantly associated with the involvement of patients in treatment decision-making. A total of 3824 patients submitted self-reported efficacy evaluations during treatment. The percentage of patients with good self-reported efficacy was 76.5% (for patients treated for the first time), 61.7% (for patients treated for the second time), and 43.2% (for patients treated after recurrence and metastasis), respectively. Occupation, education level, average annual family income, place of residence, time since cancer diagnosis, hospital type, clinical stage, targeted therapy, and involvement in treatment decision-making were the main influencing factors of self-reported efficacy of treatment.DiscussionConclusively, CRC patients are not highly dominant in treatment decision-making and more likely to make treatment decisions with their family and doctors. Timely and effective communication between doctors and patients can bolster patient involvement in treatment decision-making.

show abstract

Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer risk factors, screening, and associated factors in advanced colorectal cancer patients: a multicenter cross-sectional study in China

Cited by 6 publications

References 29 publications

Predictors of Stages of Adoption for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Patients in Turkey

Predictors of Stages of Adoption for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Patients in Turkey

Knowledge Attitude and Practices of Health Care Workers towards Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings in Durban, South Africa: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy among patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a nationwide multi-center cross-sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About