Barriers to bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening: A comparison of non-responders, active decliners and non-attenders

9Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Participation in bowel scope screening (BSS) is low (43%), limiting its potential to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of barriers to BSS and examine the extent to which these barriers differed according to non-participant profiles: non-responders to the BSS invitation, active decliners of the invitation, and non-attenders of confirmed appointments. Methods: Individuals invited for BSS between March 2013 and December 2015, across 28 General Practices in England, were sent a questionnaire. Questions measured initial interest in BSS, engagement with the information booklet, BSS participation, and, where applicable, reasons for BSS non-attendance. Chi-square tests of independence were performed to examine the relationship between barriers, non-participant groups and socio-demographic variables. Results: 1478 (45.8%) questionnaires were returned for analysis: 1230 (83.2%) attended screening, 114 (7.7%) were non-responders to the BSS invitation, 100 (6.8%) were active decliners, and 34 (2.3%) were non-attenders. Non-responders were less likely to have read the whole information booklet than active decliners (x 2 (2, N = 157) = 7.00, p = 0.008) and non-attenders (x 2 (2, N = 101) = 8.07, p = 0.005). Non-responders also had lower initial interest in having BSS than either active decliners (x 2 (2, N = 213) = 6.07, p = 0.014) or non-attenders (x2 (2, N = 146) = 32.93, p < 0.001). Overall, anticipated pain (33%) and embarrassment (30%) were the most commonly cited barriers to BSS participation. For non-attenders, however, practical, appointment-related reasons were most common (27%). Conclusions: Interventions to improve BSS uptake should be more nuanced and use targeted strategies to address the specific needs of each group.

References Powered by Scopus

Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

1416Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy

854Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Once-only sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: Follow-up findings of the italian randomized controlled trial - SCORE

535Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Exploring non-participation in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review of qualitative studies

8Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Barriers to colonoscopy in UK colorectal cancer screening programmes: Qualitative interviews with ethnic minority groups

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Predictors of Intention Translation in Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening for Colorectal Cancer

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Von Wagner, C., Bonello, B., Stoffel, S., Skrobanski, H., Freeman, M., Kerrison, R. S., & McGregor, L. M. (2018). Barriers to bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening: A comparison of non-responders, active decliners and non-attenders. BMC Public Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6071-8

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘240481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

55%

Researcher 5

45%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 9

64%

Nursing and Health Professions 2

14%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2

14%

Computer Science 1

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0