Cargando…
Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072]
BACKGROUND: The major limit to colorectal cancer screening effectiveness is often low compliance. We studied the reasons for non compliance and determinants of compliance to faecal occult blood tests in Lazio, Italy. METHODS: This is a case-control study nested within a trial that tested the effect...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1352351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16372903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-139 |
_version_ | 1782126665304899584 |
---|---|
author | Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Federici, Antonio Bartolozzi, Francesco Farchi, Sara Borgia, Piero Guasticchi, Gabriella |
author_facet | Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Federici, Antonio Bartolozzi, Francesco Farchi, Sara Borgia, Piero Guasticchi, Gabriella |
author_sort | Giorgi Rossi, Paolo |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The major limit to colorectal cancer screening effectiveness is often low compliance. We studied the reasons for non compliance and determinants of compliance to faecal occult blood tests in Lazio, Italy. METHODS: This is a case-control study nested within a trial that tested the effect of type of test and provider on colorectal cancer screening compliance. Non compliant trial subjects were classified as cases, and compliant subjects were classified as controls. We sampled 600 cases and 600 controls matched by their general practitioner, half were invited for screening at the hospital, and the other half directly at their general practitioner's office. Cases and controls answered questions on: distance from test provider, logistical problems, perception of colorectal cancer risk, confidence in screening efficacy, fear of results, presence of colorectal cancer in the family, and gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: About 31% of cases never received the letter offering free screening, and 17% of the sampled population had already been screened. The first reported reason for non-compliance was "lack of time" (30%); the major determinant of compliance was the distance from the test provider: odds ratio >30 minutes vs <15 minutes 0.3 (95%CI = 0.2–0.7). The odds ratio for lack of time was 0.16 (95% IC 0.1–0.26). The effect was stronger if the hospital (0.03 95%CI = 0.01–0.1) rather than the general practitioner (0.3 95%CI = 0.2–0.6) was the provider. Twenty-two percent of controls were accompanied by someone to the test. CONCLUSION: To increase compliance, screening programmes must involve test providers who are geographically close to the target population. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1352351 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-13523512006-01-28 Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Federici, Antonio Bartolozzi, Francesco Farchi, Sara Borgia, Piero Guasticchi, Gabriella BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The major limit to colorectal cancer screening effectiveness is often low compliance. We studied the reasons for non compliance and determinants of compliance to faecal occult blood tests in Lazio, Italy. METHODS: This is a case-control study nested within a trial that tested the effect of type of test and provider on colorectal cancer screening compliance. Non compliant trial subjects were classified as cases, and compliant subjects were classified as controls. We sampled 600 cases and 600 controls matched by their general practitioner, half were invited for screening at the hospital, and the other half directly at their general practitioner's office. Cases and controls answered questions on: distance from test provider, logistical problems, perception of colorectal cancer risk, confidence in screening efficacy, fear of results, presence of colorectal cancer in the family, and gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: About 31% of cases never received the letter offering free screening, and 17% of the sampled population had already been screened. The first reported reason for non-compliance was "lack of time" (30%); the major determinant of compliance was the distance from the test provider: odds ratio >30 minutes vs <15 minutes 0.3 (95%CI = 0.2–0.7). The odds ratio for lack of time was 0.16 (95% IC 0.1–0.26). The effect was stronger if the hospital (0.03 95%CI = 0.01–0.1) rather than the general practitioner (0.3 95%CI = 0.2–0.6) was the provider. Twenty-two percent of controls were accompanied by someone to the test. CONCLUSION: To increase compliance, screening programmes must involve test providers who are geographically close to the target population. BioMed Central 2005-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC1352351/ /pubmed/16372903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-139 Text en Copyright © 2005 Rossi et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Federici, Antonio Bartolozzi, Francesco Farchi, Sara Borgia, Piero Guasticchi, Gabriella Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title | Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title_full | Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title_fullStr | Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title_full_unstemmed | Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title_short | Understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [ISRCTN83029072] |
title_sort | understanding non-compliance to colorectal cancer screening: a case control study, nested in a randomised trial [isrctn83029072] |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1352351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16372903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-139 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT giorgirossipaolo understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 AT federiciantonio understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 AT bartolozzifrancesco understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 AT farchisara understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 AT borgiapiero understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 AT guasticchigabriella understandingnoncompliancetocolorectalcancerscreeningacasecontrolstudynestedinarandomisedtrialisrctn83029072 |