Date: 24 Feb 2006
Predictors of Lower Endoscopy Use Among Patients at Three Inner-City Neighborhood Health Centers
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Although colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the U.S., screening rates are low. Understanding the predictors of CRC screening is needed. In 2003, a random sample of patients aged 50 and over from three inner-city health centers was surveyed by computer-assisted telephone interview concerning CRC screening. The questionnaire was based on the Transtheoretical Model and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Factor analysis with Varimax rotation and logistic regression analyses were conducted. Of 319 surveys with data about endoscopy, 148 (46%) met guidelines (19 reported sigmoidoscopy within 5 years, 105 reported colonoscopy within 10 years, and 24 reported both within 5 years). Factor analysis identified three factors associated with increased likelihood of lower endoscopy within guidelines: Social Influence for CRC Screening (Eigenvalue 1.73), Barriers to Lower Endoscopy (Eigenvalue 2.00), and Lower Endoscopy Benefit/Ease (Eigenvalue 1.19). Variables in logistic regression associated with a lower rate of endoscopy include being African American (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% confidence interval = 0.13–0.96), being a current smoker (OR = 0.13, CI = 0.03–0.60), and having a higher score on the Barriers to Lower Endoscopy factor (i.e., viewed the inconvenience and unpleasant aspects as more troubling, OR = 0.33, CI = 0.18–0.60). The perceived inconvenience and unpleasant aspects of lower endoscopy are substantial barriers to screening. Advances in colon preparation procedures and better educational campaigns might lessen this perceived barrier and may be particularly important in disadvantaged and African American communities.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2001 cancer data by site and race. http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/TableV.asp?group=1a&Year=2001&Gender=MF&RateType=A geadjType&TableType=MORT. 2005. Accessed August 17, 2005.
US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening—colorectal cancer. Update, 2002 release. www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfix.htm. 2002. AHRQ.
American Cancer Society. ACS Cancer Detection Guidelines. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_2_3X_ACS_Cancer, 1–3. 1-6-2004. Accessed May 14, 2005.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Colorectal cancer screening according to the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/page.asp?yr=2002&state=All&cat=CC#CC. 2005. Accessed August 18, 2005.
Guidry JJ, Aday LA, Zhang D, Winn RJ. The role of informal and formal social support networks for patients with cancer. Cancer Pract. 1997;5:241–246.PubMed
Shokar NK, Vernon SW, Weller SC. Cancer and colorectal cancer: knowledge, beliefs, and screening preferences of a diverse patient population. Fam Med. 2005;37:341–347.PubMed
Bastani R, Gallardo NV, Maxwell AE. Barriers to colorectal cancer screening among ethnically diverse high-and average-risk individuals. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2001;19:65–84.CrossRef
Trauth JM, Ling BS, Weissfeld JL, Schoen RE, Hayran M. Using the transtheoretical model to stage screening behavior for colorectal cancer. Health Educ Behav. 2003;30:322–336.CrossRef
Zimmerman RK, Nowalk MP, Raymund M et al. Tailored interventions to increase influenza vaccination in neighborhood health centers serving the disadvantaged. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:1699–1705.PubMed
Montano DE, Kasprzyk D. The theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002:67–98.
Prochaska JO, Redding CA, Evers KE. The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002:99–120.
Aday LA. Designing and Conducting Health Surveys. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.; 1989.
Baier M, Calonge N, Cutter G, et al. Validity of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behavior. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000;9:229–232.PubMed
DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park: Sage; 1991.
National Cancer Institute and Center for Disease Control and Prevention. State cancer profiles: screening and risk factors. http://statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/cgi-bin/risk.pl?09&0&1&1&1. Accessed August 8, 2005.
Sharma VK, Chockalingham SK, Ugheoke EA, et al. Prospective, randomized, controlled comparison of the use of polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution in four-liter versus two-liter volumes and pretreatment with either magnesium citrate or bisacodyl for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:167–171.CrossRefPubMed
Zimmerman RK, Nowalk MP, Tabbarah, M. Predictors of colorectal cancer screening in diverse populations. 2005. Bethesda MD. NCI Small Grant Program for Behavioral Research in Cancer Control Grantee Meeting. Accessed May 8, 2005. Conference Proceeding.
Leard LE, Savides TJ, Ganiats TG. Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening. J Fam Pract. 1997;45:211–218.PubMed
Montano DE, Phillips WR. Cancer screening by primary care physicians: a comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:795–800.PubMed
- Predictors of Lower Endoscopy Use Among Patients at Three Inner-City Neighborhood Health Centers
Journal of Urban Health
Volume 83, Issue 2 , pp 221-230
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Cancer screening
- Colorectal cancer
- Health services research
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Family Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3518 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA
- 2. Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA