Open AccessPrevalence of appropriate colorectal cancer screening and preferences for receiving screening advice among people attending outpatient clinics
Author(s) -
Dodd Natalie,
Mansfield Elise,
Carey Mariko,
Oldmeadow Christopher
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
australian and new zealand journal of public health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.946
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1753-6405
pISSN - 1326-0200
DOI - 10.1111/1753-6405.12776
Subject(s) - medicine , colonoscopy , colorectal cancer screening , outpatient clinic , family medicine , logistic regression , colorectal cancer , cancer screening , public health , cross sectional study , cancer , nursing , pathology
Objective: To examine among people attending outpatient clinics aged 50–74 at average risk of colorectal cancer (CRC): 1) The proportion who report: a) faecal occult blood test (FOBT) within the past two years; and b) colonoscopy within the past five years, including the reasons for undergoing colonoscopy; 2) characteristics associated with under‐screening; 3) For those who are under‐screened, the proportion who are: a) willing to receive help and the acceptability of different methods of receiving help, and; b) unwilling to receive help and reasons for this. Methods: Cross‐sectional survey of 197 participants attending a major regional hospital in New South Wales, Australia. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine correlates of under‐screening. Results: A total of 59% reported either FOBT in the past two years or colonoscopy in the past five years. Of those reporting colonoscopy in the past five years, 21% were potentially over‐screened. Males were more likely than females to be under‐screened. Of those under‐screened (41%), fewer than half were willing to receive screening advice. Conclusions and implications for public health: A significant proportion of people attending outpatient clinics are under‐screened for CRC, with some people also over‐screened. There is a need to explore strategies to overcome both under‐ and over‐screening.