Siu Hing Lo

Colorectal cancer screening uptake over three biennial invitation rounds in the English bowel cancer screening programme

Objective To examine patterns of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake over three biennial invitation rounds in the National Health Service (NHS) Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England. Methods We analysed data from the BCSPs Southern Hub for individuals (n=62 099) aged 60–64 years at the time of first invitation to screening with a follow-up period that allowed for two further biennial invitations. Data on sex, age and a neighbourhood-level measure of socioeconomic deprivation were used in the analysis. Outcomes included uptake of guaiac-based faecal occult blood (gFOB) test screening, inadequate gFOB screening (≥1 test kit(s) returned but failed to complete further gFOB tests needed to reach a conclusive test result), test positivity, compliance with follow-up examinations (usually colonoscopy) and diagnostic outcomes. Results Overall gFOB uptake was 57.4% in the first, 60.9% in the second and 66.2% in third biennial invitation round. This resulted in 70.1% of the initial cohort having responded at least once, 60.7% at least twice and 44.4% three times. Participation in the first round was strongly predictive of participation in the second round (‘Previous Responders’: 86.6% vs ‘Previous Non-Responders’: 23.1%). Participation in the third round was highest among ‘Consistent Screeners’ (94.5%), followed by ‘Late Entrants’ (78.0%), ‘Dropouts’ (59.8%) and ‘Consistent Non-Responders’ (14.6%). Socioeconomic inequalities in uptake were observed across the three rounds, but sex inequalities decreased over rounds. Inadequate gFOB screening was influenced by screening history and socioeconomic deprivation. Screening history was the only significant predictor of follow-up compliance. Conclusions Screening history is associated with overall gFOB uptake, inadequate gFOB screening and follow-up compliance. Socioeconomic deprivation is also consistently associated with lower gFOB uptake and inadequate gFOB screening. Improving regular screening among identified ‘at-risk’ groups is important for the effectiveness of CRC screening programmes.

Implementation intention and planning interventions in Health Psychology: Recommendations from the Synergy Expert Group for research and practice

The current article details a position statement and recommendations for future research and practice on planning and implementation intentions in health contexts endorsed by the Synergy Expert Group. The group comprised world-leading researchers in health and social psychology and behavioural medicine who convened to discuss priority issues in planning interventions in health contexts and develop a set of recommendations for future research and practice. The expert group adopted a nominal groups approach and voting system to elicit and structure priority issues in planning interventions and implementation intentions research. Forty-two priority issues identified in initial discussions were further condensed to 18 key issues, including definitions of planning and implementation intentions and 17 priority research areas. Each issue was subjected to voting for consensus among group members and formed the basis of the position statement and recommendations. Specifically, the expert group endorsed statements and recommendations in the following areas: generic definition of planning and specific definition of implementation intentions, recommendations for better testing of mechanisms, guidance on testing the effects of moderators of planning interventions, recommendations on the social aspects of planning interventions, identification of the preconditions that moderate effectiveness of planning interventions and recommendations for research on how people use plans.

Comparing barriers to colorectal cancer screening with barriers to breast and cervical screening: a population-based survey of screening-age women in Great Britain

Objective Uptake of cancer screening tends to be lower for colorectal cancer (CRC) than cervical or breast cancer. Dislike of the test itself has often been identified as a barrier to CRC screening with the Faecal Occult Blood (FOB) test, but there have been no head-to-head comparisons of the three tests. Methods Women aged 50–80 (n = 890) were recruited in spring 2012 as part of a population-based TNS Research International survey in Great Britain. Those in the eligible age range were asked if they had ever participated in breast, cervical or CRC screening. For each screening test, women who had never participated were asked for their ‘main reason’ using a checklist of barriers. Results Among eligible women, 67%, 83% and 90% reported ever having been screened for CRC, cervical and breast cancer respectively. More socioeconomically deprived women were less likely to report any screening, and single women were less likely to report CRC or breast screening than married women. Age was not associated with participation. Overall there were few differences between tests in the reported barriers, but dislike of the test was endorsed more often for CRC screening. Conclusion This was the first study to compare barriers to participation in organised screening programmes for CRC, breast and cervical cancer. Cancer screening tests share many barriers, but dislike of the test appears to be a stronger barrier to CRC screening. Women who are non-participants in more than one programme may have more global barriers to screening, such as cancer fatalism. The findings suggest that uptake of CRC screening could be improved by targeting the unpleasantness of stool sampling.

Predictors of repeat participation in the NHS bowel cancer screening programme.

Objectives:Most types of population-based cancer screening require repeat participation to be effective. This study investigated predictors of repeat participation in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP).Methods:The BCSP in England offers biennial colorectal cancer screening using a guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBt) from age 60–74 years. This analysis included 62 081 individuals aged 60–64 years at the time of the first invitation (R1). The main outcome was repeat participation at their second (R2) or third (R3) invitation. Behavioural measures derived from screening records included late return of the gFOBt kit, compliance with follow-up investigations and previous screening participation. Other potential predictors of repeat participation included results of individual test kit analysis (normal, weak positive, strong positive, spoilt) and the definitive result of the gFOBt screening episode (normal or abnormal). Age, sex and socioeconomic deprivation were also recorded.Results:Overall repeat uptake was 86.6% in R2 and 88.6% in R3. Late return of the test kit was consistently associated with lower uptake (R2: 82.3% vs 88.6%, P<0.001; R3: 84.5% vs 90.5%, P<0.001). A definitive abnormal gFOBt result in the previous screening episode was a negative predictor of repeat uptake (R2: 61.4% vs 86.8%, P<0.001; R3: 65.7% vs 88.8%, P<0.001). Weak positive (R2: 76.9% vs 86.8%, P<0.001; R3: 81.7% vs 88.8%, P<0.05) and spoilt test kits (R2: 79.0% vs 86.6%, NS; R3: 84.2% vs 92.2%, P<0.05) were associated with lower repeat uptake, but were not consistently independent predictors in all invitation rounds or subgroups. Among those with a definitive abnormal gFOBt result, noncompliance with follow-up in a previous screening episode was also associated with lower repeat uptake (R2: 24.3% vs 67.1%, P<0.001; R3: 43.2% vs 69.9%, P<0.001).Conclusions:Behavioural markers and test results from previous screening episodes have been implicated in subsequent gFOBt uptake.

Social Cognitive Mediators of Sociodemographic Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake

Background. This study examined if and how sociodemographic differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake can be explained by social cognitive factors. Methods. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with individuals aged 60–70 years (n = 1309) living in England as part of a population-based omnibus survey. Results. There were differences in screening uptake by SES, marital status, ethnicity, and age but not by gender. Perceived barriers (stand. b = −0.40, p < 0.001), social norms (stand. b = 0.33, p < 0.001), and screening knowledge (stand. b = 0.17, p < 0.001) had independent associations with uptake. SES differences in uptake were mediated through knowledge, social norms, and perceived barriers. Ethnic differences were mediated through knowledge. Differences in uptake by marital status were primarily mediated through social norms and to a lesser extent through knowledge. Age differences were largely unmediated, except for a small mediated effect via social norms. Conclusions. Sociodemographic differences in CRC screening uptake were largely mediated through social cognitive factors. Impact. Our findings suggest that multifaceted interventions might be needed to reduce socioeconomic inequalities. Ethnic differences might be reduced through improved screening knowledge. Normative interventions could emphasise screening as an activity endorsed by important others outside the immediate family to appeal to a wider audience.

Self-Reported And Objectively Recorded Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation In England

Objective To compare self-reported with objectively recorded participation in Faecal Occult Blood testing (FOBt) colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a national programme. Methods Survey respondents living in England who were eligible for screening were asked in face-to-face interviews if they had ever been invited to do a CRC screening test, how many times they had been invited, and how many times they had participated. National Health Service (NHS) Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) records were consulted for respondents who had consented to a record check. The outcome measures were ‘ever uptake’ (responded to ≥1 invitation), ‘repeat uptake’ (responded to ≥2 invitations), and ‘consistent uptake’ (responded to all invitations). Results In the verified group, self-reported ever uptake was highly consistent with recorded ever uptake (87.0% vs. 87.8%). Among those who indicated that they had been invited more than once, self-reported repeat uptake was 89.8% compared with 84.8% recorded repeat uptake. Among those with more than one recorded invitation, self-reported repeat uptake was 72.7% compared with 77.2% recorded repeat uptake, and self-reported consistent uptake was 81.6% compared with 65.6% recorded consistent uptake. Conclusion Our results suggest that people can accurately report whether they have ever taken part in CRC screening. The vast majority of those whose records were verified could also accurately report whether they had taken part in screening at least twice. They were somewhat less accurate in reporting whether they had responded to all screening invitations.

The impact of media coverage of the Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial on English colorectal screening uptake

Objective To assess the impact of media coverage of the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial on colorectal screening uptake in England. Setting In April 2010, publication of the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) Trial results generated considerable media interest in both FS and colorectal cancer (CRC) generally. Methods We used routinely collected data from the south of England (excluding London) to analyse return of faecal occult blood test (FOBt) kits within 28 days of the invitation (early uptake) among 60–69 year olds, before (T1, n = 31,229), around the time of (T2, n = 39,571), and one month after (T3, n = 33,430) the FS publicity. Results FOBt uptake over the whole period was 58.2%, with 38.4% of the kits returned within 28 days (early uptake). Across the three time periods, early uptake was 35.8% at T1, 39.4% at T2, and 39.7% at T3. Multivariate regression controlling for age, gender and socioeconomic status confirmed that uptake was higher if people received the FOBt kit around the time of the media coverage (T2: odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.13–1.20), or one month after (T3: OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.15–1.22) than before (T1). Sub-group analyses demonstrated that the impact was stronger among previous non-responders than among first-time invitees or previous responders (P < 0.001). Conclusion Media coverage of the FS Trial appeared to have a small but positive impact on FOBt screening uptake, especially among people who had previously abstained from screening.

Patient-reported outcomes following flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer in a demonstration screening programme in the UK.

Objectives Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening for colorectal cancer will be introduced into the National Cancer Screening Programmes in England in 2013. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from trial participants indicate high acceptability and no adverse physical or psychological consequences, but this may not generalize to routine screening in the community. This study examined PROMs in a community-based FS screening programme. Methods Eligible adults aged 58–59 (n = 2016) registered at 34 London general practices were mailed a National Health Service-endorsed invitation to attend FS screening. Pain and side-effects were assessed in a ‘morning-after’ questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed in a three-month follow-up questionnaire. Anxiety, self-rated health and colorectal symptoms were assessed at prescreening and follow-up. Results In total, 1020 people attended screening and were included in the current analyses, of whom 913 (90%) returned the morning-after questionnaire, and 674 (66%) the follow-up questionnaire. The prescreening questionnaire had been completed by 751 (74%) of those who attended. The majority (87%) of respondents reported no pain or mild pain, and the most frequent side-effect (wind) was only experienced more than mildly by 16%. Satisfaction was extremely high, with 98% glad they had the test; 97% would encourage a friend to have it. From prescreening to follow-up there were no changes in anxiety or self-rated health, and the number of colorectal symptoms declined. Satisfaction and changes in wellbeing were not moderated by gender, deprivation, ethnicity or screening outcome. Conclusions PROMs indicate high acceptability of FS screening in 58–59 year olds, with no adverse effects on colorectal symptoms, health status or psychological wellbeing.

Does psychosocial stress exacerbate avoidant responses to cancer information in those who are afraid of cancer? A population-based survey among older adults in England

Objective: Communication of cancer information is an important element of cancer control, but cancer fear may lead to information avoidance, especially when coping is low. We examined the association between cancer fear and cancer information avoidance, and tested whether this was exacerbated by psychosocial stress. Design: Cross-sectional survey of 1258 population-based adults (58–70 years) in England. Main outcome measures: Cancer fear (intensity and frequency), perceived psychosocial stress and cancer information avoidance. Control variables were age, gender, ethnicity, marital status and education. Results: A quarter (24%) of respondents avoided cancer information. Ordinal logistic regression analyses showed main effects of psychosocial stress (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.07–1.29) and cancer fear: cancer information avoidance was lowest in those with no cancer fear (13%), followed by those with moderate (24%; OR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.49–3.12), and high cancer fear (35%; OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.65–5.73). In the adjusted model, the interaction between cancer fear and stress was significant (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.004–1.29, p < .05): 40% of those with high fear/high stress avoided cancer information compared with 29% with high fear/low stress. Conclusion: Cancer fear and psychosocial stress interact to produce disengagement with cancer-related information, highlighting the importance of affective processes to cancer control efforts.

PWE-370 Colonoscopy comfort and subsequent faecal occult blood screening uptakein the english bowel cancer screening programme

Introduction Abnormal guaiac Faecal Occult Blood test (gFOBt) screening results are associated with lower subsequent screening uptake among individuals who are referred back for routine screening (Lo et al . 2015). Negative experience with a colonoscopy prompted by a positive gFOBt may contribute to an individual’s decision not to repeat screening. This study examined the association between nurse-reported colonoscopy discomfort on subsequent gFOBt screening uptake in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Method gFOBt uptake of three screening invitation rounds (R1-R3) was recorded for 322,791 individuals aged 60–64 at the time of the first gFOBt screening invitation and living within the catchment area of the Southern Hub of the NHS BCSP. Nurse-reported colonoscopy discomfort scores (no/ minimal/ mild/ moderate/ severe) from a previous episode (R1 or R2) were used to predict repeat gFOBt uptake in R2 and R3 among individuals who remained eligible for routine screening. 1,566 out of 2,489 (63%) individuals who had undergone a colonoscopy in R1 remained eligible for screening in R2. 1,444 out of 5,720 (25%) individuals who had undergone a first colonoscopy in R1 or R2 were eligible for screening in R3. Nurse-reported colonoscopy discomfort scores were recorded for 1,495 out of 1,566 (95%) individuals who were invited for repeat gFOBt screening in R2 and 1,366 out of 1,444 (95%) who were invited for repeat screening in R3. Discomfort scores from second and further colonoscopies were excluded from the analysis, as they were only available for a very small number of patients (n ≤ 44). Results Discomfort during the first colonoscopy examination was not associated with subsequent gFOBt screening uptake in R2 (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.84 – 1.11, p = 0.63) or R3 (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.82 – 1.14, p = 0.67). There was, however, evidence of a negative association between discomfort during recovery after the first examination and subsequent gFOBt uptake in R2 (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56 – 0.99, p = 0.04) and in R3 (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43 – 1.02, p = 0.06). Conclusion Discomfort during a first colonoscopy examination did not appear to be associated with reduced subsequent gFOBt screening uptake, although discomfort during recovery was associated with lower subsequent uptake. Future research should repeat this analysis in a national sample and include adherence to surveillance as an additional outcome for people with intermediate- and high-risk adenomas detected at colonoscopy. Disclosure of interest None Declared.