Dataset Information

Psychological distance: a qualitative study of screening barriers among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Colorectal cancer screening can reduce the incidence and mortality through early detection. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with colorectal cancer are at high risk for colorectal cancer and therefore require colonoscopy. However, despite the high risk, screening adherence among FDRs remains low and the barriers to undergoing screening among FDRs in China are not clear. We explored the reasons why FDRs refused screening.

Methods

In this qualitative study, 28 semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted face-to-face. Participants were recruited at two hospitals (an urban tertiary hospital and a community health center) in Guangzhou, South China. We used qualitative content analysis to analyze transcripts based on audio recordings and identify major themes and subthemes.

Results

Three major themes emerged related to FDRs' low screening participation. First, the emotional distance between FDRs and medicine was pulled away by uncomfortable feelings approaching hospitals and misunderstanding of cancer. Second, they confirmed their health state and minimized cancer risk if they had no signs in routine health examination, no symptoms and maintained a healthy, happy life. Third, they considered screening far from their daily life from the perspective of spatial distance and priority. Therefore, screening was not necessary in their view.

Conclusions

Healthcare professionals should narrow psychological distance between people and screening when promoting screening technology.

SUBMITTER: Zhang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8045384 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHaving a first-degree relative (FDR) with colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant risk factor for CRC. Counseling for FDRs regarding CRC risk factors and personalized risk is important to improve knowledge and screening compliance.MethodsA 3-arm randomized controlled trial compared tailored in-person and telephone CRC counseling interventions with controls among FDRs who were not mutation carriers for known hereditary cancer syndromes, but who were considered to be at an increased risk based on family history. It was hypothesized that both telephone and in-person approaches would increase CRC knowledge, screening adherence, perceived risk accuracy, and psychosocial functioning compared with controls. The authors anticipated greater satisfaction with the in-person approach. CRC knowledge, risk perception, psychosocial functioning, and intention to screen were assessed at baseline and at 2-week and 2-month follow-ups (primary endpoint).ResultsA total of 278 FDRs (mean age, 47.4 years, standard deviation, 11.38 years) participated. At baseline, participants reported low to moderate CRC knowledge and overestimations of risk. Screening adherence was 73.7%. At 2 months, participants in the in-person arm and telephone arm demonstrated improvements in knowledge and perceived risk and were not found to be statistically different from each other. However, when comparing each intervention with controls, knowledge in the in-person arm was found to be statistically significantly higher, but the difference between the telephone and control arms was not. Cancer-related stress reduced over time in all groups. Intervention benefits were maintained at 1 year. Baseline screening intent/adherence were high, and therefore did not reach statistically significant improvement.ConclusionsTailored in-person or telephone formats for providing CRC risk counseling, incorporating behavioral interventions, appear to improve knowledge and risk perceptions, with high client satisfaction.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in first degree relatives (parents and full siblings) of patients with precursor lesions (polyps) for CRC.DesignCase-control study.SettingLinkage to the multi-generation register and gastrointestinal ESPRESSO (Epidemiology Strengthened by histoPathology Reports in Sweden) histopathology cohort in Sweden.Participants68 060 patients with CRC and 333 753 matched controls.Main outcome measuresMultivariable adjusted odds ratios of CRC according to the number of first degree relatives with a colorectal polyp and the histology of polyps and age at diagnosis in first degree relatives. Subgroup analysis was also performed according to age at CRC diagnosis and evaluated the joint association of family history of colorectal polyps and family history of CRC.ResultsAfter adjusting for family history of CRC and other covariates, having a first degree relative with a colorectal polyp (8.4% (5742/68 060) in cases and 5.7% (18 860/333 753) in controls) was associated with a higher risk of CRC (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 1.45). The odds ratios ranged from 1.23 for those with hyperplastic polyps to 1.44 for those with tubulovillous adenomas. To better put this risk in perspective, the age specific absolute risk of colon and rectal cancers was estimated according to family history of polyps based on the 2018 national CRC incidence in Sweden. For example, the absolute risk of colon cancer in individuals aged 60-64 years with and without a family history of colorectal polyp was, respectively, 94.3 and 67.9 per 100 000 for men and 89.1 and 64.1 per 100 000 for women. The association between family history of polyps and CRC risk was strengthened by the increasing number of first degree relatives with polyps (≥2 first degree relatives: 1.70, 1.52 to 1.90, P<0.001 for trend) and decreasing age at polyp diagnosis (<50 years: 1.77, 1.57 to 1.99, P<0.001 for trend). A particularly strong association was found for early onset CRC diagnosed before age 50 years (≥2 first degree relatives: 3.34, 2.05 to 5.43, P=0.002 for heterogeneity by age of CRC diagnosis). In the joint analysis, the odds ratio of CRC for individuals with two or more first degree relatives with polyps but no CRC was 1.79 (1.52 to 2.10), with one first degree relative with CRC but no polyps was 1.70 (1.65 to 1.76), and with two or more first degree relatives with both polyps and CRC was 5.00 (3.77 to 6.63) (P<0.001 for interaction).ConclusionsAfter adjusting for family history of CRC, the siblings and children of patients with colorectal polyps are still at higher risk of CRC, particularly early onset CRC. Early screening for CRC might be considered for first degree relatives of patients with polyps.

Project description:BackgroundIt is very necessary to implement gastric cancer screening in China to reduce the mortality of gastric cancer, but there are no national screening guidelines and programs. Understanding of individual preferences is conducive to formulating more acceptable screening strategies, and discrete choice experiments can quantify individual preferences. In addition, the first-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients are at high risk for gastric cancer. Compared with those without a family history of gastric cancer, the risk of gastric cancer in first-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients is increased by 60%. Therefore, a discrete choice experiment was carried out to quantitatively analyse the preferences of first-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients for gastric cancer screening to serve as a reference for the development of gastric cancer screening strategies.MethodsA questionnaire was designed based on a discrete choice experiment, and 342 first-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients were investigated. In STATA 15.0 software, the data were statistically analysed using a mixed logit model.ResultsThe five attributes included in our study had a significant influence on the preferences of first-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients for gastric cancer screening (P < 0.05). Participants most preferred the sensitivity of the screening program to be 95% (coefficient = 1.424, P < 0.01) with a willingness to pay 2501.902 Yuan (95% CI, 738.074-4265.729). In addition, the participants' sex and screening experiences affected their preferences. An increase in sensitivity 35 to 95% had the greatest impact on the participants' willingness to choose a gastric cancer screening program.ConclusionThe formulation of gastric cancer screening strategies should be rooted in people's preferences. The influence of sex differences and screening experiences on the preferences of people undergoing screening should be considered, and screening strategies should be formulated according to local conditions to help them play a greater role.