Preferences for Different Diagnostic Modalities to Follow Up Abnormal Colorectal Cancer Screening Results: a Hypothetical Vignette Study

Overview

Journal BMJ Open

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2020 Jul 28

PMID 32713846

Citations 1

Authors

Aradhna Kaushal

Sandro Tiziano Stoffel

Robert Kerrison

Christian Von Wagner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: In England, a significant proportion of people who take part in the national bowel cancer screening programme (BCSP) and have a positive faecal occult blood test (FOBt) result, do not attend follow-up colonoscopy (CC). The aim of this study was to investigate differences in intended participation in a follow-up investigation by diagnostic modality offered including CC, CT colonography (CTC) or capsule endoscopy (CE).

Setting: We performed a randomised online experiment with individuals who had previously completed an FOBt as part of the English BCSP.

Methods: Participants (n=953) were randomly allocated to receive one of three online vignettes asking participants to imagine they had received an abnormal FOBt result, and that they had been invited for a follow-up test. The follow-up test offered was either: CC (n=346), CTC (n=302) or CE (n=305). Participants were then asked how likely they were to have their allocated test or if they refused, either of the other tests. Respondents were also asked to cite possible emotional and practical barriers to follow up testing. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate intentions.

Results: Intention to have the test was higher in the CTC group (96.7%) compared with the CC group (91.8%; OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.22 to 5.73). CTC was considered less 'off-putting' (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94) and less uncomfortable compared with CC (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77). For those who did not intend to have the test they were offered, CE (39.7%) or no investigation (34.5%) was preferable to CC (8.6%) or CTC (17.2%).

Conclusions: Alternative tests have the potential to increase attendance at diagnostic follow-up appointments.

Citing Articles

Acceptance and Preference of Computed Tomographic Colonography and Colonoscopy: Results of a Nationwide Multicenter Comparative Questionnaire Survey in Japan.

Kato T, Sasaki K, Nagata K, Hirayama M, Endo S, Horita S J Anus Rectum Colon. 2024; 8(2):84-95.

PMID: 38689783 PMC: 11056531. DOI: 10.23922/jarc.2023-025.

References

Pooler B, Baumel M, Cash B, Moawad F, Riddle M, Patrick A . Screening CT colonography: multicenter survey of patient experience, preference, and potential impact on adherence. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012; 198(6):1361-6. PMC: 3689205. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7671. View

Wardle J, McCaffery K, Nadel M, Atkin W . Socioeconomic differences in cancer screening participation: comparing cognitive and psychosocial explanations. Soc Sci Med. 2004; 59(2):249-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.10.030. View

Partin M, Powell A, Burgess D, Wilt T . Bringing an organizational perspective to the optimal number of colorectal cancer screening options debate. J Gen Intern Med. 2011; 27(3):376-80. PMC: 3286551. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1870-y. View

Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A, Swain P . Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature. 2000; 405(6785):417. DOI: 10.1038/35013140. View

Kearns B, Whyte S, Seaman H, Snowball J, Halloran S, Butler P . Factors associated with completion of bowel cancer screening and the potential effects of simplifying the screening test algorithm. Br J Cancer. 2016; 114(3):327-33. PMC: 4742589. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.469. View

Carlson C, Kirby K, Casadei M, Partin M, Kistler C, Walter L . Lack of follow-up after fecal occult blood testing in older adults: inappropriate screening or failure to follow up?. Arch Intern Med. 2010; 171(3):249-56. PMC: 3021762. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.372. View

Patall E, Cooper H, Robinson J . The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: a meta-analysis of research findings. Psychol Bull. 2008; 134(2):270-300. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270. View

Beshara A, Ahoroni M, Comanester D, Vilkin A, Boltin D, Dotan I . Association between time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac fecal test result and risk of colorectal cancer and advanced stage disease at diagnosis. Int J Cancer. 2019; 146(6):1532-1540. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32497. View

Plumb A, Ghanouni A, Rainbow S, Djedovic N, Marshall S, Stein J . Patient factors associated with non-attendance at colonoscopy after a positive screening faecal occult blood test. J Med Screen. 2016; 24(1):12-19. DOI: 10.1177/0969141316645629. View

10.

Stoffel S, Goodwin M, Sieverding M, Vlaev I, Von Wagner C . Testing verbal quantifiers for social norms messages in cancer screening: evidence from an online experiment. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(1):658. PMC: 6542069. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-019-6997-5. View

11.

Hirst Y, Stoffel S, Baio G, McGregor L, Von Wagner C . Uptake of the English Bowel (Colorectal) Cancer Screening Programme: an update 5 years after the full roll-out. Eur J Cancer. 2018; 103:267-273. PMC: 6202675. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.07.135. View

12.

Logan R, Patnick J, Nickerson C, Coleman L, Rutter M, Von Wagner C . Outcomes of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England after the first 1 million tests. Gut. 2011; 61(10):1439-46. PMC: 3437782. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300843. View

13.

Stoffel S, Hirst Y, Ghanouni A, McGregor L, Kerrison R, Verstraete W . Testing active choice for screening practitioner's gender in endoscopy among disinclined women: An online experiment. J Med Screen. 2018; 26(2):98-103. PMC: 6484820. DOI: 10.1177/0969141318806322. View

14.

Kim D, Pickhardt P, Taylor A, Leung W, Winter T, Hinshaw J . CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(14):1403-12. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa070543. View

15.

Dalton A . Incomplete diagnostic follow-up after a positive colorectal cancer screening test: a systematic review. J Public Health (Oxf). 2017; 40(1):e46-e58. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdw147. View

16.

Smith S, McGregor L, Raine R, Wardle J, von Wagner C, Robb K . Inequalities in cancer screening participation: examining differences in perceived benefits and barriers. Psychooncology. 2016; 25(10):1168-1174. PMC: 5082500. DOI: 10.1002/pon.4195. View

17.

Pioche M, Ganne C, Gincul R, De Leusse A, Marsot J, Balique J . Colon capsule versus computed tomography colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with positive fecal occult blood test who refuse colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Endoscopy. 2018; 50(8):761-769. DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-100721. View

18.

Von Wagner C, Bonello B, Stoffel S, Skrobanski H, Freeman M, Kerrison R . Barriers to bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening: a comparison of non-responders, active decliners and non-attenders. BMC Public Health. 2018; 18(1):1161. PMC: 6173878. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-6071-8. View

19.

Honein-AbouHaidar G, Kastner M, Vuong V, Perrier L, Daly C, Rabeneck L . Systematic Review and Meta-study Synthesis of Qualitative Studies Evaluating Facilitators and Barriers to Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016; 25(6):907-17. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0990. View

20.

McGregor L, Von Wagner C, Vart G, Yuen W, Raine R, Wardle J . The impact of supplementary narrative-based information on colorectal cancer screening beliefs and intention. BMC Cancer. 2015; 15:162. PMC: 4397889. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1167-3. View