Factors Influencing Choices for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Previously Unscreened African and Caucasian Americans: Findings from a Triangulation Mixed Methods Investigation
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
We investigated factors that influence choice of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test and assessed the most- and least-preferred options among fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and double contrast barium enema among adults with varied race, gender, and geographic region demographics. Mixed methods data collection consisted of 10 focus group interviews and a survey of the 93 focus group participants. Participants were ≥50 years of age and reported not having been screened for colorectal cancer in the last ten years. Analyses examined differences by race, gender, and geographic location. Participants had modest knowledge about CRC and there were fewer correct answers to knowledge questions by African Americans. Participants recognized value of early detection, and identified health symptoms and their doctor’s recommendation as influential for obtaining CRC screening. They chose colonoscopy and FOBT as the most preferred tests, while barium enema was least preferred. The analysis revealed intra-group variations in preference, though there were no significant differences by race, gender, or location. Openness of discussing this sensitive topic, lack of knowledge about colorectal cancer and screening costs, and diversity of preferences expressed within study groups suggest the importance of patient-physician dialogue about colorectal cancer screening options. New approaches to promoting colorectal cancer screening need to explore methods to facilitate patients establishing and expressing preferences among the screening options.
- Jemal, A., Murray, T., Samuels, A., Ghafoor, A., Ward, E., & Thun, M. J. (2003). Cancer statistics, 2003. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 53(1), 5–26. CrossRef
- Donald, J. J., & Burhenne, H. J. (1993). Colorectal cancer. Can we lower the death rate in the 1990s? Canadian Field-Naturalist, 39, 107–114.
- Burt, R. W., Bishop, D. T., Cannon, L. A., Dowdle, M. A., Lee, R. G., & Skolnick, M. H. (1985). Dominant inheritance of adenomatous colonic polyps and colorectal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 312(24), 1540–1544.
- DeCosse, J. J., Tsioulias, G. J., & Jacobson, J. S. (1994). Colorectal cancer: Detection, treatment, and rehabilitation. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 44(1), 27–42. CrossRef
- Fuchs, C. S., Giovannucci, E. L., Colditz, G. A., Hunter, D. J., Speizer, F. E., & Willett, W. C. (1994). A prospective study of family history and the risk of colorectal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 331(25), 1669–1674. CrossRef
- Ries, L., Eisner, M., Kosary, C., et al. (2003). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2000. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute.
- Smith, R. A., Cokkinides, V., & Eyre, H. J. (2006). American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer, 2006. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 56(1), 11–25; quiz 49–50.
- Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data. (1997). Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
- Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., Fowler, F. J., Jr., & Welch, H. G. (2004). Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. Jama, 291(1), 71–78. CrossRef
- Beeker, C., Kraft, J. M., Southwell, B. G., & Jorgensen, C. M. (2000). Colorectal cancer screening in older men and women: Qualitative research findings and implications for intervention. Journal of Community Health, 25(3), 263–278. CrossRef
- Vernon, S. W. (1997). Participation in colorectal cancer screening: A review. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 89(19), 1406–1422. CrossRef
- Neilson, A. R., & Whynes, D. K. (1995). Determinants of persistent compliance with screening for colorectal cancer. Social Science & Medicine, 41(3), 365–374. CrossRef
- Woolf, S. H. (2000). The best screening test for colorectal cancer—a personal choice. New England Journal of Medicine, 343(22), 1641–1643. CrossRef
- Van Ness, M. M., Chobanian, S. J., Winters, C., Jr., Diehl, A. M., Esposito, R. L., & Cattau, E. L., Jr. (1987). A study of patient acceptance of double-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy. Which procedure is preferred by patients? Archives of Internal Medicine, 147(12), 2175–2176. CrossRef
- Leard, L. E., Savides, T. J., & Ganiats, T. G. (1997). Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening. Journal of Family Psychology, 45(3), 211–218.
- Pignone, M., Bucholtz, D., & Harris, R. (1999). Patient preferences for colon cancer screening. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 14(7), 432–437. CrossRef
- Fetters, M. D., Ivankova, N. V., Ruffin, M. T., Creswell, J. W., & Power, D. (2004). Developing a Web site in primary care. Family Medicine, 36(9), 651–659.
- Ruffin, M. T. I., Fetters, M. D., & Jimbo, M. (2007). Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Preventive Medicine, 45, 267–273. CrossRef
- Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Archives of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7–12. CrossRef
- Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2002). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Creswell, J. W. (2001). Mixed method designs. In Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (1st ed., pp. 559–601). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples (Vol. 1). Sage Publications.
- Stange, K. C., Miller, W. L., Crabtree, B. F., O’Connor, P. J., & Zyzanski, S. J. (1994). Multimethod research: Approaches for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9(5), 278–282. CrossRef
- Stange, K. C. (1996). One size doesn’t fit all. Multimethod research yields new insights into interventions to increase prevention in family practice. Journal of Family Practice, 43(4), 358–360.
- Borkan, J. M. (2004). Mixed methods studies: A foundation for primary care research. Archives of Family Medicine, 2(1), 4–6. CrossRef
- Power, D. (2001). Rewriting the rules: Recruiting for focus groups on colorectal cancer required a creative approach. Quirk’s Marketing Research Review, 15(11), 24–29.
- Gregg, J., & Curry, R. H. (1994). Explanatory models for cancer among African-American women at two Atlanta neighborhood health centers: The implications for a cancer screening program. Social Science and Medicine, 39(4), 519–526. CrossRef
- The Multicentre Australian Colorectal-neoplasia Screening (MACS) Group. (2006). A comparison of colorectal neoplasia screening tests: A multicentre community-based study of the impact of consumer choice. Medical Journal of Australia, 184(11), 546–550.
- Elston, L. J., Divine, G., Moon, C., & Wiliams, L. (2006). Patient-physician colorectal cancer screening discussions and screening use. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 31, 202–209. CrossRef
- Salkeld, G. P., Young, J. M., & Solomon, M. J. (2006). Consumer choice and the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. Medical Journal of Australia, 184(11), 541–542.
- Segnan, N., Senore, C., Andreoni, B., et al. (2005). Randomized trial of different screening strategies for colorectal cancer: Patient response and detection rates. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 97(5), 347–357. CrossRef
- Factors Influencing Choices for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Previously Unscreened African and Caucasian Americans: Findings from a Triangulation Mixed Methods Investigation
Journal of Community Health
Volume 34, Issue 2 , pp 79-89
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Colorectal cancer screening
- Decision making
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan Health System, 1018 Fuller Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104-1213, USA
- 2. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 241 Teachers College Building, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA