Barriers to flexible sigmoidoscopy colorectal cancer screening in low uptake socio-demographic groups: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise qualitative evidence related to barriers and facilitators of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening (FSS) intention and uptake, particularly within low socio-demographic uptake groups. FSS uptake is lower amongst women, lower socio-economic status (SES), and Asian ethnic groups within the United Kingdom (UK) and United States of America. METHODS: A total of 12 168 articles were identified from searches of four databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria included: individuals eligible to attend FSS and empirical peer-reviewed studies that analysed qualitative data. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool evaluated the methodological quality of included studies, and thematic synthesis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Ten qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Key barriers to FSS intention and uptake centred upon procedural anxieties. Women, including UK Asian women, reported shame and embarrassment, anticipated pain, perforation risk, and test preparation difficulties to elevate anxiety levels. Religious and cultural-influenced health beliefs amongst UK Asian groups were reported to inhibit FSS intention and uptake. Competing priorities, such as caring commitments, particularly impeded women's ability to attend certain FSS appointments. The review identified a knowledge gap concerning factors especially associated with FSS participation amongst lower SES groups. CONCLUSIONS: Studies mostly focussed on barriers and facilitators of intention to participate in FSS, particularly within UK Asian groups. To determine the barriers associated with FSS uptake, and further understand how screening intention translates to behaviour, it is important that future qualitative research is equally directed towards factors associated with screening behaviour.

Anxiety Associated with Colonoscopy and Flexible Sigmoidoscopy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Addressing procedure-related anxiety should improve adherence to colorectal cancer screening programs and diagnostic colonoscopy. We performed a systematic review to assess anxiety among individuals undergoing colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS). METHODS: We searched multiple electronic databases for studies evaluating anxiety associated with colonoscopy or FS published from 2005 to 2017. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality. The main outcomes were the magnitude of pre-procedure anxiety, types of concerns, predictors of anxiety, and effectiveness of anxiety-lowering interventions in individuals undergoing lower endoscopy. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO. RESULTS: Fifty-eight studies (24,490 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Patients undergoing colonoscopy had a higher mean level of anxiety than that previously reported in the general population, with some studies reporting more than 50% of patients having moderate-to-severe anxiety. Areas of anxiety-related concern included bowel preparation, difficulties with the procedure (embarrassment, pain, possible complications, and sedation), and concerns about diagnosis; including fear of being diagnosed with cancer. Female gender, higher baseline anxiety, functional abdominal pain, lower education, and lower income were associated with greater anxiety prior to colonoscopy. Providing higher-quality information before colonoscopy, particularly with a video, shows promise as a way of reducing pre-procedure anxiety but the studies to date are of low quality. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of patients undergoing colonoscopy report anxiety before the procedure. Improvement in pre-procedure information delivery and evaluation of approaches to reduce anxiety is required, especially for those with predictors of pre-procedure anxiety.

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy and CT Colonography Screening: Patients' Experience with and Factors for Undergoing Screening-Insight from the Proteus Colon Trial.

Purpose To compare the acceptability of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening and the factors predicting CT colonographic screening participation, targeting participants in a randomized screening trial. Materials and Methods Eligible individuals aged 58 years (n = 1984) living in Turin, Italy, were randomly assigned to be invited to screening for colorectal cancer with FS or CT colonography. After individuals who had died or moved away (n = 28) were excluded, 264 of 976 (27.0%) underwent screening with FS and 298 of 980 (30.4%) underwent CT colonography. All attendees and a sample of CT colonography nonattendees (n = 299) were contacted for a telephone interview 3-6 months after invitation for screening, and screening experience and factors affecting participation were investigated. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed by means of multivariable logistic regression. Results For the telephone interviews, 239 of 264 (90.6%) FS attendees, 237 of 298 (79.5%) CT colonography attendees, and 182 of 299 (60.9%) CT colonography nonattendees responded. The percentage of attendees who would recommend the test to friends or relatives was 99.1% among FS and 93.3% among CT colonography attendees. Discomfort associated with bowel preparation was higher among CT colonography than FS attendees (OR, 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47, 5.24). CT colonography nonattendees were less likely to be men (OR, 0.36; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.71), retired (OR, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.75), to report regular physical activity (OR, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.70), or to have read the information leaflet (OR, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.41). They were more likely to mention screening-related anxiety (mild: OR, 6.30; 95% CI: 2.48, 15.97; moderate or severe: OR, 3.63; 95% CI: 1.87, 7.04), erroneous beliefs about screening (OR, 32.15; 95% CI: 6.26, 165.19), or having undergone a recent fecal occult blood test (OR, 13.69; 95% CI: 3.66, 51.29). Conclusion CT colonography and FS screening are well accepted, but further reducing the discomfort from bowel preparation may increase CT colonography screening acceptability. Negative attitudes, erroneous beliefs about screening, and organizational barriers are limiting screening uptake; all these factors are modifiable and therefore potentially susceptible to interventions. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Do no harm: no psychological harm from colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Participation in cancer screening programmes might cause worries in the population outweighting the benefits of reduced mortality. The present study aimed to investigate possible psychological harm of participation in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening pilot in Norway. METHODS: In a prospective, randomised trial participants (aged 50-74 years) were invited to either flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening, faecal immunochemical test (FIT), or no screening (the control group; 1 : 1: 1). Three thousand two hundred and thirteen screening participants (42% of screened individuals) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire as well as the SF-12-a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaire when invited to screening and when receiving the screening result. A control group was invited to complete the questionnaires only. Two thousand six hundred and eighteen control participants (35% of invited individuals) completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: A positive screening result did not increase participants' level of anxiety or depression, or decrease participants' level of HRQOL. Participants who received a negative result reported decreased anxiety and improvement on some HRQOL dimensions. However, no change was considered to be of clinical relevance. CONCLUSION: The current study showed no clinically relevant psychological harm of receiving a positive CRC screening result or of participating in FS or FIT screening, in a Norwegian population.

Diabetes Status and Being Up-to-Date on Colorectal Cancer Screening, 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

INTRODUCTION: Although screening rates for colorectal cancer are increasing, 22 million Americans are not up-to-date with recommendations. People with diabetes are an important and rapidly growing group at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Screening status and predictors of being up-to-date on screening are largely unknown in this population. METHODS: This study used logistic regression modeling and data from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to examine the association between diabetes and colorectal cancer screening predictors with being up-to-date on colorectal cancer screening according to criteria of the US Preventive Services Task Force for adults aged 50 or older. State prevalence rates of up-to-date colorectal cancer screening were also calculated and mapped. RESULTS: The prevalence of being up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening for all respondents aged 50 or older was 65.6%; for respondents with diabetes, the rate was 69.2%. Respondents with diabetes were 22% more likely to be up-to-date on colorectal cancer screening than those without diabetes. Among those with diabetes, having a routine checkup within the previous year significantly increased the odds of being up-to-date on colorectal cancer screening (odds ratio, 1.90). Other factors such as age, income, education, race/ethnicity, insurance status, and history of cancer were also associated with up-to-date status. CONCLUSION: Regardless of diabetes status, people who had a routine checkup within the past year were more likely to be up-to-date than people who had not. Among people with diabetes, the duration between routine checkups may be of greater importance than the frequency of diabetes-related doctor visits. Continued efforts should be made to ensure that routine care visits occur regularly to address the preventive health needs of patients with and patients without diabetes.

Invitation strategies for colorectal cancer screening programmes: The impact of an advance notification letter.

AIM: To estimate the impact of an advance notification letter on participation in sigmoidoscopy (FS) and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening. METHODS: Eligible subjects, invited in 3 Italian population based programmes using FS and in 5 using FIT, were randomised (1:1:1), within GP, to: A) standard invitation letter; B) advance notification followed after 1month by the standard invitation; and C) B+indication to contact the general practitioner (GP) to get advice about the decision to be screened. We calculated the 9-month attendance and the incremental cost of each strategy. We conducted a phone survey to assess GP's utilization and predictors of participation. RESULTS: The advance notification was associated with a 20% increase in the attendance among 15,655 people invited for FS (B vs A - RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.10-1.25; C vs A - RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.12-1.27); the incremental cost ranged between 10 and 9 Euros. Participation in FIT screening (N=23,543) was increased only with simple pre-notification (B vs A - RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10); the incremental cost was 22.5 Euros. GP consultation rate was not increased in group C. CONCLUSIONS: An advance notification represents a cost-effective strategy to increase participation in FS screening; its impact on the response to FIT screening was limited.

Understanding Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in Kentucky.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer screening rates have increased significantly in Kentucky, from 35% in 1999 to 66% in 2012. A continued improvement in screening requires identification of existing barriers and implementation of interventions to address barriers. METHODS: The state of Kentucky added a question to the 2012 Kentucky Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey for respondents aged 50 years or older who answered no to ever having been screened for colorectal cancer by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy to assess the reasons why respondents had not been screened. Combined responses constituted 4 categories: attitudes and beliefs, health care provider and health care systems barriers, cost, and other. Prevalence estimates for barriers were calculated by using raking weights and were stratified by race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, and health insurance coverage. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios for barriers to screening. RESULTS: The most common barriers in all areas were related to attitudes and beliefs, followed by health care provider and systems, and cost. Non-Hispanic whites and respondents with more than a high school education were more likely to choose attitudes and beliefs as a barrier than were non-Hispanic blacks and those with less than a high school education. Respondents with low incomes and with no insurance were significantly more likely to select cost as a barrier. No significant associations were observed between demographic variables and the selection of a health care provider and a health care system. CONCLUSION: Barriers related to education, race/ethnicity, income, and insurance coverage should be considered when designing interventions. Expansion of Medicaid and implementation of the Affordable Care Act in Kentucky could have an impact on reducing these barriers.

Patient attitudes and issues in colon cancer screening.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death in the United States, and is largely preventable by CRC screening (CRCS). Participation in CRCS, however, is much lower than participation in other forms of preventive care. Many reasons for low rates of participation have been identified, and can be generally divided into provider- and patient-specific issues. Lack of a provider recommendation is a well-established and widely reported patient barrier to CRCS. Numerous patient-specific issues have been identified, ranging from fear of CRCS test results to lack of knowledge about individual risk for CRC and inadequate resources to complete CRCS. This article discusses the impact of patient attitudes and issues toward CRCS, with particular attention to modifiable psychosocial factors, the importance of patient preferences for one CRCS test over another, knowledge of CRC risk, and the impact of educational tools on patient compliance with CRCS.

Sociopsychological tailoring to address colorectal cancer screening disparities: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Interventions tailored to sociopsychological factors associated with health behaviors have promise for reducing colorectal cancer screening disparities, but limited research has assessed their impact in multiethnic populations. We examined whether an interactive multimedia computer program (IMCP) tailored to expanded health belief model sociopsychological factors could promote colorectal cancer screening in a multiethnic sample. METHODS: We undertook a randomized controlled trial, comparing an IMCP tailored to colorectal cancer screening self-efficacy, knowledge, barriers, readiness, test preference, and experiences with a nontailored informational program, both delivered before office visits. The primary outcome was record-documented colorectal cancer screening during a 12-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes included postvisit sociopsychological factor status and discussion, as well as clinician recommendation of screening during office visits. We enrolled 1,164 patients stratified by ethnicity and language (49.3% non-Hispanic, 27.2% Hispanic/English, 23.4% Hispanic/Spanish) from 26 offices around 5 centers (Sacramento, California; Rochester and the Bronx, New York; Denver, Colorado; and San Antonio, Texas). RESULTS: Adjusting for ethnicity/language, study center, and the previsit value of the dependent variable, compared with control patients, the IMCP led to significantly greater colorectal cancer screening knowledge, self-efficacy, readiness, test preference specificity, discussion, and recommendation. During the followup period, 132 (23%) IMCP and 123 (22%) control patients received screening (adjusted difference = 0.5 percentage points, 95% CI -4.3 to 5.3). IMCP effects did not differ significantly by ethnicity/language. CONCLUSIONS: Sociopsychological factor tailoring was no more effective than nontailored information in encouraging colorectal cancer screening in a multiethnic sample, despite enhancing sociopsychological factors and visit behaviors associated with screening. The utility of sociopsychological tailoring in addressing screening disparities remains uncertain.

Colorectal cancer risk information presented by a nonphysician assistant does not increase screening rates.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of presenting individualized colorectal cancer (CRC) risk information for increasing CRC screening rates in primary care patients at above-average risk of CRC. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Georgia Regents University in Augusta-an academic family medicine clinic in the southeastern United States. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients (50 to 70 years of age) scheduled for routine visits in the family medicine clinic who were determined to be at above-average risk of CRC. INTERVENTIONS: Individualized CRC risk information calculated from the Your Disease Risk tool compared with a standard CRC screening handout. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intention to complete CRC screening. Secondary measures included the proportions of subjects completing fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 1147 consecutive records were reviewed to determine eligibility. Overall, 210 (37.7%) of 557 eligible participants were randomized to receive either individualized CRC risk information (prepared by a research assistant) or a standard CRC screening handout. The intervention group had a mean (SD) age of 55.7 (4.8) years and the control group had a mean (SD) age of 55.6 (4.6) years. Two-thirds of the participants in each group were female. The intervention group and the control group were matched by race (P = .40). There was no significant difference between groups for intention to complete CRC screening (P = .58). Overall, 26.7% of the intervention participants and 27.7% of the control participants completed 1 or more CRC screening tests (P = .66). CONCLUSION: Presentation of individualized CRC risk information by a nonphysician assistant as a decision aid did not result in higher CRC screening rates in primary care patients compared with presentation of general CRC screening information. Future research is needed to determine if physician presentation of CRC risk information would result in increased screening rates compared with research assistant presentation.

Role of anxiety in the comfort of nonsedated average-risk screening sigmoidoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective study was to assess the role of generalized anxiety disorder in the comfort of nonsedated, average-risk screening sigmoidoscopy. METHODS: Patients were asked to complete a screening questionnaire before undergoing average-risk colon cancer screening with nonsedated sigmoidoscopy. The questionnaire included demographic information and a series of Likert-based and visual analog scales designed to assess patient comfort, procedural symptom severity, and satisfaction. The Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders questionnaire was used to assess for generalized anxiety disorder. Comfort levels and postprocedural symptom severity were recorded immediately after the procedure and 1 week postprocedure. χ and t tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-seven patients tested positive for anxiety (high anxiety), whereas 54 tested negative (low anxiety). There were no differences in anxiety according to sex (P = 0.53), or age (P = 0.32). There was no difference in reaching the splenic flexure between high- and low-anxiety patients (P = 0.15); however, pairwise comparisons revealed patients with high anxiety reported significantly higher levels of abdominal pain after the procedure (P < 0.01) and still recalled higher pain from the procedure 1 week later (P < 0.01) than those patients with low anxiety scores. Furthermore, those patients with high anxiety reported significantly more procedure-related cramping and bloating both immediately after the procedure and again 1 week later (P < 0.01). Finally, patients with high anxiety reported the procedure as being more uncomfortable 1 week later, when compared with low-anxiety patients (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The level of anxiety correlated directly to pain and discomfort postprocedure and related inversely to the level of satisfaction. Better management of anxiety may lead to better procedural comfort in nonsedated procedures.

No effect of perianal application of topical anaesthetic on patient comfort during nonsedated flexible sigmoidoscopy: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

AIM: A literature review revealed no data on the effects of topical anaesthetic on patient comfort during flexible sigmoidoscopy. We therefore aimed to evaluate this in a randomized manner. METHOD: One hundred and forty-six patients who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy were randomly allocated to one of three groups. Vaseline (n = 49), 2% lidocaine gel (n = 51) or a cream of 2.5% lidocaine plus 2.5% prilocaine (n = 46) were applied to the patients 30 min before the procedure. Demographic data and haemodynamic monitoring during procedures were recorded. Pain was assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) and anxiety levels by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-I and STA-II). RESULTS: Median pre-procedural STAI-I scores were 45, 46 and 40.5 and median post-procedural STAI-I scores were 35, 34 and 33.5 for the vaseline, lidocaine, and lidocaine/prilocaine treatments, respectively. There was no statistical difference among the groups in terms of STAI-I and II scores. However, post-procedural STAI-I scores were significantly lower than pre-procedural values in each group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in VAS scores among the groups. In all groups there were statistically higher VAS scores during the procedure compared with the pre- and post-procedural scores (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Perianal application of topical anaesthetic does not influence patient comfort during sigmoidoscopy.

Psychosocial risk profiles among black male Veterans Administration patients non-adherent with colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: This study identifies unique psychosocial characteristics among African American men that put the men at risk for non-adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and fecal occult blood tests (FOBT)). Subgroups sharing similar psychosocial characteristics may be targeted with specific intervention strategies aimed at increasing participation in screening, which could lead to increased early detection and decreased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The male African American veterans in our sample (n = 260) had a mean age of 57.3 (SD = 7.3) years. Our study employs latent class analysis, a quantitative-based, audience segmentation method to identify homogeneous subgroups of African American men with similar psychosocial characteristics related to CRC screening, potentially in need of different health information and intervention strategies. Latent class regression was used to examine the relationships among latent class structure and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: There were four psychosocial risk classes across the three screening tests. A significant subset of men had psychosocial characteristics indicative of willingness to be screened for each test (colonscopy = 21.8%, sigmoidoscopy = 31.5%, and FOBT = 10.8%), although they were currently non-adherent. Men who received a past screening test, had greater than a high school education, or were married were more likely to be represented in a latent class indicative of being prepared for getting colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. Sociodemographic variables were unrelated to FOBT latent class structure. CONCLUSIONS: Segmenting our sample of male African American veterans based on psychosocial risk characteristics can inform the development of more precisely targeted interventions for African American men who are non-adherent for CRC screening.

Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous research points to differences between predictors of intention to screen for colorectal cancer (CRC) and screening behavior, and suggests social ecological factors may influence screening behavior. The aim of this study was to compare the social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention to screen with predictors of participation. METHODS: People aged 50 to 74 years recruited from the electoral roll completed a baseline survey (n = 376) and were subsequently invited to complete an immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT). RESULTS: Multivariate analyses revealed five predictors of intention to screen and two predictors of participation. Perceived barriers to CRC screening and perceived benefits of CRC screening were the only predictor of both outcomes. There was little support for social ecological factors, but measurement problems may have impacted this finding. CONCLUSIONS: This study has confirmed that the predictors of intention to screen for CRC and screening behaviour, although overlapping, are not the same. Research should focus predominantly on those factors shown to predict participation. Perceptions about the barriers to screening and benefits of screening are key predictors of participation, and provide a focus for intervention programs.

Nurses' experiences of a colorectal cancer screening pilot.

This article describes a study that set out to explore the experience of endoscopy nurse practitioners participating in the Department of Health-funded UK Nurse-led Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Colorectal Cancer Screening Pilot. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the three nurse practitioners involved and were analysed using Thematic Analysis, a qualitative method for analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data. Nurse practitioners found that participating in the study improved their skills and provided job satisfaction despite the hard work it entailed. A varied workload consisting of diagnostic and screening procedures, in addition to the other duties of nurse practitioners, may be desirable for nurses working in the field of gastroenterology.

Preferences for colorectal cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines underline the role of individual preferences in the selection of a screening test, as insufficient evidence is available to recommend one screening test over another. We conducted a study to determine the preferences of individuals and to predict uptake for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using various screening tests. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire was distributed among naive subjects, yet to be screened, and previously screened subjects, aged 50-75 years. Subjects were asked to choose between scenarios on the basis of faecal occult blood test (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), total colonoscopy (TC) with various test-specific screening intervals and mortality reductions, and no screening (opt-out). RESULTS: In total, 489 out of 1498 (33%) screening-naïve subjects (52% male; mean age+/-s.d. 61+/-7 years) and 545 out of 769 (71%) previously screened subjects (52% male; mean age+/-s.d. 61+/-6 years) returned the questionnaire. The type of screening test, screening interval, and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality influenced subjects' preferences (all P<0.05). Screening-naive and previously screened subjects equally preferred 5-yearly FS and 10-yearly TC (P=0.24; P=0.11), but favoured both strategies to annual FOBT screening (all P-values <0.001) if, based on the literature, realistic risk reduction of CRC-related mortality was applied. Screening-naive and previously screened subjects were willing to undergo a 10-yearly TC instead of a 5-yearly FS to obtain an additional risk reduction of CRC-related mortality of 45% (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: These data provide insight into the extent by which interval and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality affect preferences for CRC screening tests. Assuming realistic test characteristics, subjects in the target population preferred endoscopic screening over FOBT screening, partly, due to the more favourable risk reduction of CRC-related mortality by endoscopy screening. Increasing the knowledge of potential screenees regarding risk reduction by different screening strategies is, therefore, warranted to prevent unrealistic expectations and to optimise informed choice.

Childhood trauma is associated with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis responsiveness in irritable bowel syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A history of early adverse life events (EALs) is associated with a poorer outcome and higher levels of distress in adult patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders. An EAL is thought to predispose individuals to develop a range of chronic illnesses by inducing persistent changes in the central stress response systems, including the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. We sought to determine if EALs affect the HPA axis response to a visceral stressor in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients and healthy controls, and to determine if this is affected by sex or related to symptoms or quality of life. METHODS: Forty-four IBS patients (25 women, 19 men) and 39 healthy controls (21 women, 18 men) were assessed for gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms and EALs by validated questionnaires and interview. All subjects underwent a visceral stressor (sigmoidoscopy). Salivary cortisol was collected at baseline and serially for 1 hour poststressor. RESULTS: Twenty-one IBS patients and 18 controls had EALs. In subjects with and without IBS, an EAL was associated with higher mean (+/-SD) cortisol levels (0.32 +/- 0.2 vs 0.20 +/- 0.1 microg/dL; P = .003) and higher area under the curve (28.1 +/- 17 vs 18.6 +/- 13 microg x min/dL; P = .005) after the stressor compared with subjects without EALs. In IBS, a faster resolution of cortisol to basal values corresponded to lower symptom severity (r = -0.36, P < .05) and better disease-specific quality of life (r = 0.33, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: HPA axis hyperresponsiveness to a visceral stressor is related more to a history of EALs than to the presence of IBS. However, HPA axis reactivity has a moderating effect on IBS symptoms.

Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening decision stage.

OBJECTIVE: This paper reports on factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision stage (SDS) in screening-eligible primary care patients. METHODS: Baseline telephone survey data (i.e., sociodemographic background, CRC screening perceptions, and SDS) were obtained for 1515 patients in a randomized behavioral intervention trial. Respondents reported SDS, a measure of proximity to actual screening, after listening to descriptions of screening stool blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy as had never heard of (NHO), were not considering or were undecided (NCU), or decided to do (DTD) each test. Polychotomous regression analyses were performed to differentiate participants by SDS. RESULTS: At baseline, SDS was distributed as follows: NHO (8%), NCU (41%), and DTD (51%). We found that individuals who had DTD compared to those who were NCU about screening were older (OR=0.64), had prior cancer screening (OR=1.43), believed screening is important (OR=3.44), and had high social support (OR=2.49). Persons who were NCU compared to NHO participants were female (OR=2.18), were white (OR=2.35), had prior cancer screening (OR=2.81), and believed screening is important (OR=2.44). CONCLUSIONS: Prior screening and belief in screening importance were found to be consistently associated with SDS across comparisons, while older age, gender, race, and social support were not.

Parental attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about genetic testing for FAP and colorectal cancer surveillance in minors.

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is the second most common hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome and confers a nearly 100% lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer. Understanding factors that facilitate and inhibit genetic testing and cancer surveillance in children who are members of families affected by FAP will better equip clinicians to clarify misunderstandings and facilitate appropriate care. The aims of this study were to examine parental attitudes and beliefs regarding endoscopic surveillance and genetic testing in minors at risk for developing FAP. This cross-sectional study includes analyses of qualitative and quantitative interview data collected from parents of children with or at risk for FAP. This report includes data from 28 parents with a total of 51 biological children between 10-17 years of age. The parents had a clinical and/or genetic diagnosis of FAP. Most commonly reported facilitators included provider recommendation (surveillance) and personalized medical management (genetic testing). Most commonly reported barriers included lack of provider recommendation (surveillance) and cost (genetic testing).

Ethnic differences in participation in flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine ethnic differences in participation in colorectal cancer screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS). It assessed both intentions to be screened and actual screening uptake, and considered whether demographic, health and psychosocial factors mediated the ethnic differences. The setting of this study follows a subset of participants from the UK FS Trial. METHODS: A postal questionnaire assessed ethnicity, demographic characteristics, health, attitudes to screening and FS screening intentions. Data on screening intentions were available for 17,333 adults aged 55-64 years (Sample 1). Screening uptake was recorded in a subsample of 4303 respondents who were subsequently randomized to receive an invitation to screening (Sample 2). RESULTS: Screening intentions in Sample 1 were equally high across all the ethnic groups (>80% [13,724/17,042] reported they were interested). In contrast, attendance (Sample 2) was considerably lower among Asians (54% [43/79]) compared with White (69% [2843/4123]) or Black (80% [33/41]) respondents. Multivariate analysis showed that potential explanatory factors, including socioeconomic deprivation, poor health and fearful and fatalistic attitudes did not account for the lower screening attendance among Asians. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to identify explanations for the gap between intentions and behaviour in UK Asians if any future FS screening programme is to be introduced equitably.