Abstract
Background
Most of the individuals concerned by colorectal cancer screening recognize the importance of screening participation. However, the screening rates for this cancer remain low in most countries, including France. Based on the action control framework, the present study aimed to (i) explore the distribution of intentions-behavior profiles toward colorectal cancer screening and (ii) to determine to what extent the profiles could be differentiated on theory of planned behavior (TPB) (i.e., attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control [PBC]) and self-regulation variables (i.e., action planning, coping planning).
Method
A total of 149 participants from the general French population (M = 60 years, SD = 7.04) completed a questionnaire measuring TPB and self-regulation variables. Subsequent screening behavior was determined from medical records. Participants were notably categorized as non-intenders, unsuccessful intenders, or successful intenders. Data were analyzed using discriminant function analysis and analyses of covariance.
Results
Main findings revealed that 71% of the intenders were unsuccessful intenders. TPB and self-regulation variables were significantly correlated with the discriminant function (rs ≥ .40). Successful and unsuccessful intenders reported significantly higher levels of subjective norms, PBC, and coping planning than non-intenders (ps < .01). Successful intenders reported a significantly higher level of coping planning than unsuccessful intenders (p < .01).
Conclusions
Further research appears necessary to empirically test to what extent interventions targeting subjective norms, PBC, and coping planning could enhance the proportion of successful intenders toward colorectal cancer screening.
References
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
INCa. Les cancers en France en 2018 - L’essentiel des faits et chiffres [Cancers in France in 2018- Essential facts and numbers]. 2019.
Sarma EA, Silver MI, Kobrin SC, Marcus PM, Ferrer RA. Cancer screening: health impact, prevalence, correlates, and interventions. Psychol Health. 2019;34(9):1036–72.
Bridou M, Aguerre C, Gimenes G, Kubiszewski V, Le Gall A, Potard C, et al. Psychological barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening: a French qualitative study. Health Psychol Res 2013;1(2).
Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179–211.
Rhodes RE, de Bruijn GJ. What predicts intention-behavior discordance? A review of the action control framework. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2013;41(4):201–7.
Rhodes RE, Yao CA. Models accounting for intention-behavior discordance in the physical activity domain: a user’s guide, content overview, and review of current evidence. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12.
Sheeran P, Webb TL. The intention–behavior gap. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2016;10(9):503–18.
Rogers RW. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. J Psychol. 1975;91(1):93–114.
Orbell S, Sheeran P. “ Inclined abstainers ”: a problem for predicting health-related behaviour. Br J Soc Psychol. 1998;37(Pt 2):151–65.
Power E, Van Jaarsveld CHM, McCaffery K, Miles A, Atkin W, Wardle J. Understanding intentions and action in colorectal cancer screening. Ann Behav Med. 2008;35(3):285–94.
de Bruijn GJ, Wiedemann A, Rhodes RE. An investigation into the relevance of action planning, theory of planned behaviour concepts, and automaticity for fruit intake action control. Br J Health Psychol. 2014;19(3):652–69.
Sniehotta F, Schwarzer R, Scholz U, Schüz B. Action planning and coping planning for long-term lifestyle change: Theory and assessment. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2005;35(4):565–76.
Schwarzer R. Coping planning as an intervention component: a commentary. Psychol Health. 2016;31(7):903–6.
Walsh JC. Increasing screening uptake for a cervical smear test: predictors of attendance and the use of action plans in prior non-attenders. Ir J Psychol. 2005;26(1–2):65–73.
Rhodes RE. Evolving understanding of physical activity behavior: a multi-process action control approach. In: Elliot AJ, éditeur. Advances in motivation science. Elsevier; 2017
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn Bacon; 2013.
Godin G, Shephard RJ, Colantonio A. The cognitive profile of those who intend to exercise but do not. Public Health Rep. 1986;101(5):521–6.
McHugh ML. The Chi-square test of independence. Biochem Medica. 2012;23(2):143–9.
Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155–9.
Santé Publique France. Taux de participation au programme de dépistage organisé du cancer colorectal 2017–2018 [Participation rates in the organized colorectal cancer screening program 2017–2018] [Internet]. [Cited 2020 March 11]. Available from: https://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/maladies-et-traumatismes/cancers/cancer-du-colon-rectum/articles/taux-de-participation-au-programme-de-depistage-organise-du-cancer-colorectal-2017-20182
Pellat A, Deyra J, Coriat R, Chaussade S. Results of the national organised colorectal cancer screening program with FIT in Paris. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):4162.
Roncancio AM, Ward KK, Sanchez IA, Cano MA, Byrd TL, Vernon SW, et al. Using the theory of planned behavior to understand cervical cancer screening among Latinas. Health Educ Behav. 2015;42(5):621–6.
Milne S, Orbell S, Sheeran P. Combining motivational and volitional interventions to promote exercise participation: protection motivation theory and implementation intentions. Br J Health Psychol. 2002;7(Pt 2):163–84.
Rhodes RE, Grant S, de Bruijn GJ. Planning and implementation intention interventions. In: Hagger M, Cameron L, Hamilton K, Hankonen N, Lintunen T, editors. The Handbook of Behavior Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2020. p. 572–85.
Neter E, Stein N, Barnett-Griness O, Rennert G, Hagoel L. From the bench to public health: Population-level implementation intentions in colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46(3):273–80.
Gonzalez Salas Duhne P, Horan AJ, Ross C, Webb TL, Hardy GE. Assessing and promoting the use of implementation intentions in clinical practice. Soc Sci Med. 2020;265:113490.
Sniehotta FF, Scholz U, Schwarzer R. Bridging the intention–behaviour gap: planning, self-efficacy, and action control in the adoption and maintenance of physical exercise. Psychol Health. 2005;20(2):143–60.
de Vries H, Eggers SM, Bolman C. The role of action planning and plan enactment for smoking cessation. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):393.
Conner PM, Godin G. Temporal stability of behavioural intention as a moderator of intention–health behaviour relationships. Psychol Health. 2007;22(8):875–97.
Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a TpB Questionnaire : Conceptual and Methodological Considerations. Retrieved July 26, 2019, from http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf
Sniehotta, F. F., Schwarzer, R., Scholz, U., & Schüz, B. (2005). Action planning and coping planning for long-term lifestyle change: Theory and assessment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(4), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.258
Le Bonniec A. (2018). Les déterminants psychosociaux de la participation au dépistage du cancer colorectal : enjeux de l’arrivée du nouveau test immunologique [Psychosocial determinants of participation in colorectal cancer screening: implications of the arrival of the new immunological test]. Doctoral thesis (not published). University Paul Valery, Montpellier, France.
Acknowledgements
We are thankful to the Dépistages 34 staff for their help with recruitment, and particularly to M. Galindo, Pr. Daures, and Dr. Cherifcheikh. Finally, we sincerely thank all the participants involved in this study.
Funding
This work was supported by the French National Cancer Institute (doctoral fellowship « Human and social sciences, Epidemiology, Public health and cancer»), the Integrated Site in Cancer Research of Montpellier (Grant « Inca-DGOS-INSERM 6045»), and the French League Against Cancer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Descriptive statistics of the sample
Participants (N) | Percentage (%) | |
---|---|---|
Age M = 60.3 (SD = 7.04) | – | – |
Sex | ||
Men | 72 | 45.9 |
Women | 85 | 54.1 |
Occupational category | ||
Farmer | 1 | 0.6 |
Craftsman, shopkeeper, business owner | 5 | 3.2 |
Executive officer | 23 | 14.6 |
Intermediate profession | 9 | 5.7 |
Liberal profession | 7 | 4.5 |
Employee | 25 | 15.9 |
Worker | 3 | 1.9 |
Retiree | 67 | 42.7 |
Unemployed | 13 | 8.3 |
Other | 2 | 1.3 |
Working in the field of health | ||
Yes | 17 | 10.8 |
No | 133 | 84.7 |
Having a General Practitioner | ||
Yes | 153 | 97.5 |
No | 2 | 1.3 |
Having a health care professional’s recommendation for screening | ||
Yes | 64 | 40.8 |
No | 89 | 56.7 |
Personal history of cancer (all types) | ||
Yes | 26 | 16.6 |
No | 130 | 82.8 |
Family history of cancer (all types) | ||
Yes | 87 | 55.4 |
No | 66 | 42 |
Family history of colorectal cancer or colorectal adenoma | ||
Yes | 29 | 18.5 |
No | 123 | 78.3 |
Knowing individual(s) suffering from cancer | ||
Yes | 124 | 79 |
No | 32 | 20.4 |
Knowing individual(s) suffering from colorectal cancer | ||
Yes | 49 | 31.2 |
No | 107 | 68.2 |
Previous participation in colorectal cancer screening | ||
Yes | 86 | 54.8 |
No | 68 | 43.3 |
Frequency of screening by faecal occult blood test | ||
Never | 67 | 42.7 |
Every 5 years/1 or 2 time in total | 31 | 19.7 |
Every 2 or 3 years | 45 | 28.7 |
Every year | 2 | 1.3 |
Other screening tests achieved | ||
Yes | 79 | 50.3 |
No | 74 | 47.1 |
Other type of screening tests achieved | ||
Mammography | 69 | 43.9 |
Prostate cancer | 7 | 4.5 |
Pap-smear | 40 | 25.5 |
Appendix 2
Items of the questionnaire measuring variables of the theory of planned behavior and self-regulation variables
Variables | Items |
---|---|
Intentions | I intend to perform a screening test for colorectal cancer in the next few months |
I wish to perform a screening test for colorectal cancer in the next few months | |
Attitudes | If I do a screening test for colorectal cancer, it will allow to detect a potential health problem as soon as possible |
It is possible to recover from colorectal cancer if it is detected early thanks to the screening test | |
I think that the new immunological test for colorectal cancer is reliable | |
I don’t like thinking about the colorectal cancer screening test (R) | |
I think that performing a colorectal cancer screening test is something unpleasant (R) | |
I feel disgusted to have to take a sample of my stool myself to do the screening test (R) | |
I dread the results of my colorectal cancer screening test (R) | |
Norms | I often heard about colorectal cancer in the media and it encourages me to get screened |
I feel that most people of my age do regularly a screening test for colorectal cancer | |
I think the majority of my relatives over the age of fifty are regularly testing for colorectal cancer | |
My general practitioner has already recommended me to participate in screening for colorectal cancer | |
If the screening center in my area sends me an invitation letter to get screened for colorectal cancer, then I have to do it | |
Behavioral perceived control | I think the new immunological test for colorectal cancer is easy to perform |
I feel able to perform alone the screening test for colorectal cancer properly | |
In my daily life, I feel able to visit my general practitioner to collect the colorectal cancer screening kit even if it takes time | |
In my daily life, I think I can take the time necessary to perform a colorectal cancer screening test | |
Coping planning | For my next screening, I know how to get organized if I am out of time |
For my next screening, I know how to motivate myself if I don’t want to do it anymore | |
For my next screening, I know how to react if my emotions block me at the time of performing the test | |
Action planning | I have already planned when I will get the screening kit for colorectal cancer from my general practitioner for my next screening |
I have already planned when I will perform my next screening for colorectal cancer |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Le Bonniec, A., Gourlan, M., Préau, M. et al. Action Control of Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation with fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Int.J. Behav. Med. 29, 122–130 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-021-09976-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-021-09976-y