Factors Associated With Colorectal Cancer Screening Via Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Test in an Average-Risk Population From a Multiethnic, Middle-Income Setting.

PURPOSE: The Malaysian Ministry of Health had launched free opportunistic screening for colorectal cancer using immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) targeting the average-risk individuals since 2014. This study aims to determine factors associated with colorectal cancer screening using iFOBT among the average-risk Malaysian population. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at five government-run health clinics in the state of Selangor. Adults with an average risk of colorectal cancer (age > 50 years, asymptomatic, and no family history of colorectal cancer) were recruited using systematic random sampling. An interviewer-administered questionnaire adapted from the Cancer Awareness Measure and Health Belief Model was used. RESULTS: The median age of participants was 61 years (interquartile range, 56 to 66). Almost 60% of participants indicated their willingness to be screened. However, only 7.5% had undergone iFOBT. Good knowledge of risk factors of colorectal cancer, perceived susceptibility to the disease, and the doctor's recommendation were associated with increased willingness to be screened: adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.66 (95% CI, 1.12 to 2.46); aOR, 1.70 (95% CI, 1.08 to 2.70); and aOR, 5.76 (95% CI, 2.13 to 15.57), respectively. Nevertheless, being elderly (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.99) and high negative perception toward the testing method (iFOBT) (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.30) were independently associated with lower willingness to be screened. Multivariable analysis within the average-risk individuals who were willing to be screened for colorectal cancer showed that the doctor's recommendations remained as an important cue for positive action, whereas negative perception toward the test was a significant barrier to the actual uptake of iFOBT. CONCLUSION: The present findings must be factored in when tailoring colorectal cancer screening promotion activities in multiethnic, middle-income settings.

Anaemia among primary care patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD): a multicentred cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of anaemia among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) at primary care settings and its associated factors. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study involved 808 adult patients with T2DM and CKD who were recruited via systematic sampling from 20 public primary care clinics in Peninsular Malaysia. Their sociodemographic, clinical and biomedical profiles were collected through interviews, examination of medical records and blood testing. RESULTS: The prevalence of anaemia was 31.7% (256/808). The anaemia was mainly mild (61.5%) and normocytic normochromic (58.7%). About 88.7% of the patients with anaemia were not known to have anaemia prior to the study. Among 36 patients with documented history of anaemia, 80.6% were still anaemic, and only a half received iron therapy. Multivariate regression analysis showed that women (adjusted odd ratio (AOR): 1.57, 95% CI: 1.12 to 2.21, p=0.009) and those with older age (AOR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.06, p<0.001), CKD stage 3a (AOR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.25 to 4.87, p=0.009), CKD stage 3b (AOR: 4.36; 95% CI: 2.14 to 8.85, p<0.001), CKD stage 4 (AOR: 10.12; 95% CI: 4.36 to 23.47, p<0.001), CKD stage 5 (AOR: 10.80; 95% CI: 3.32 to 35.11, p<0.001) and foot complication (AOR 3.12, 95% CI: 1.51 to 6.46, p=0.002) were more likely to have anaemia. Having higher body mass index (AOR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92 to 0.99, p=0.012) and higher diastolic blood pressure (AOR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.99, p<0.001) were associated with lower odds to have anaemia. CONCLUSION: Anaemia among patients with T2DM and CKD in primary care was common, and the majority was unrecognised. Inadequate treatment of anaemia was also prevalent. Therefore, screening of anaemia should be incorporated into the routine assessment of diabetic complications particularly for those with significant associated factors. It is hoped that such strategy could lead to early treatment and hence improve their overall care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NMRR-15-660-24324.