Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Tailored Interactive Computer-Delivered Intervention to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening: Sometimes More is Just the Same

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

There have been few studies of tailored interventions to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

Purpose

We conducted a randomized trial of a tailored, interactive intervention to increase CRC screening.

Methods

Patients 50–70 years completed a baseline survey, were randomized to one of three groups, and attended a wellness exam after being exposed to a tailored intervention about CRC screening (tailored group), a public web site about CRC screening (web site group), or no intervention (survey-only group). The primary outcome was completion of any recommended CRC screening by 6 months.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in screening by 6 months: 30%, 31%, and 28% of the survey-only, web site, and tailored groups were screened. Exposure to the tailored intervention was associated with increased knowledge and CRC screening self-efficacy at 2 weeks and 6 months. Family history, prior screening, stage of change, and physician recommendation moderated the intervention effects.

Conclusions

A tailored intervention was not more effective at increasing screening than a public web site or only being surveyed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2010. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2010.

  2. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: A joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA: Cancer J Clin 2008 March 5; 58: 130-160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Klabunde C. Trends in the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening in the U.S. Presented at the NIH State-of-the-Science Conference: Enhancing Use and Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening, February 2–4, 2010.Bethesda, MD, 47–51. 2-2-2010. National Cancer Institute; NIH.

  4. Meissner HI, Breen NL, Klabunde CN, Vernon SW. Patterns of colorectal cancer screening uptake among men and women in the US. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 389–394.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vernon SW. Participation in colorectal cancer screening: A review. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 1406–1422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L et al. Colorectal cancer screening: Clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 594–642.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Stone EG, Morton SC, Hulscher MEJL et al. Interventions that increase use of adult immunization and cancer screening services: A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 641–651.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Snell JL, Buck EL. Increasing cancer screening: A meta-analysis. Prev Med 1996; 25: 702–707.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Peterson SK, Vernon SW. A review of patient and physician adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Semin Colon Rectal Surg 2000; 11: 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Baron RC, Rimer BK, Breslow RA et al. Client-directed interventions to increase community demand for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 2008; 35: S34–S55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baron RC, Rimer BK, Coates RC et al. Client-directed interventions to increase community access to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 2008; 35: S56–S66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sabatino SA, Habarta N, Baron RC et al. Interventions to increase recommendation and delivery of screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by healthcare providers: Systematic reviews of provider assessment and feedback and provider incentives. Am J Prev Med 2008; 35: S67–S74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull 2007; 133: 673–693.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sohl SJ, Moyer A. Tailored interventions to promote mammography screening: A meta-analytic review. Prev Med 2007; 45: 252–261.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Albada A, Ausems MGEM, Bensing JM, van Dulmen S. Tailored information about cancer risk and screening: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2009 November; 77: 155–171.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kreuter MW, Farrell D, Olevitch L, Brennan L. Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kreuter MW, Strecher VJ, Glassman B. One size does not fit all: The case for tailoring print materials. Ann Behav Med 1999; 21: 276–283.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: A decade later. Health Educ Q 1984; 11: 1–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Diclemente CC, Prochaska JO. Toward a comprehensive transtheoretical model of change. In: Miller WR, Heather N, editors. Treating Addictive Behaviors. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Plenum Press; 2002. p. 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Smith RA, von Eschenbach A, Wender R et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: Update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers. CA: Cancer J Clin 2001; 51: 38–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Godin G, Sheeran P, Conner M, Germain M. Asking questions changes behavior: Mere measurement effects on frequency of blood donation. Health Psychol 2008 March; 27: 179–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jorgensen CM, Gelb CA, Merritt TL, Seeff LC. Observations from the CDC: CDC’s screen for life- a national colorectal cancer action campaign. J Womens Health Gend Based Med 2001; 10: 417–423.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb N, Fernandez ME. Planning Health Promotion Programs: An Intervention Mapping Approach 3rd edition. (in press). San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass; 2011.

  24. Greisinger A, Hawley ST, Bettencourt JL, Perz CA, Vernon SW. Primary care patients’ understanding of colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Detect Prev 2006; 30: 67–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vernon SW, McQueen A. Colorectal cancer screening. In: Jimmie C. Holland, William S. Breitbart, Paul B. Jacobsen, Marguerite S. Lederberg, Matthew J. Loscalzo, Ruth McCorkle, editors. Psycho-oncology. 2nd ed. ed. New York,NY: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McQueen A, Vernon SW, Myers RE, Watts BG, Lee ES, Tilley BC. Correlates and predictors of colorectal cancer screening among male automotive workers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16: 500–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lairson DR, Chang Y-C, Bettencourt JL, Vernon SW, Greisinger A. Estimating development cost for a tailored interactive computer program to enhance colorectal cancer screening compliance. JAMIA 2006 September; 13: 476–484.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. McQueen A, Tiro JA, Vernon SW. Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 2231–2237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vernon SW, Myers RE, Tilley BC. Development and validation of an instrument to measure factors related to colorectal cancer screening adherence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997; 6: 825–832.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ritvo P, Myers R, Del Giudice ML et al. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening in Ontario, Canada--a replication study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008 November; 17: 3279–3283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tiro JA, Vernon SW, Hyslop T, Myers RE. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening among African Americans and Caucasians. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 2855–2861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Roserner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics, 5th edition. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995 January 21; 310: 170.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Le Henanff A, Giraudeau B, Baron G, Ravaud P. Quality of reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials. JAMA 2006; 295: 1147–1151.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Myers RE, Sifri R, Hyslop T et al. A randomized controlled trial of the impact of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening. Cancer 2007; 110: 2083–2091.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Marcus AC, Mason M, Wolfe P, Rimer BK, Lipkus IM. The efficacy of tailored print materials in promoting colorectal cancer screening: Results from a randomized trial involving callers to the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Information Service. J Health Commun 2005; 10: 83–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rawl SM, Champion VL, Scott LL et al. A randomized trial of two print interventions to increase colon cancer screening among first-degree relatives. Patient Educ Couns 2008; 71: 215–227.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ling BS, Schoen RE, Trauth JM et al. Physicians encouraging colorectal screening: A randomized controlled trial of enhanced office and patient management on compliance with colorectal cancer screening. Arch Intern Med 2009 January 12; 169: 47–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lipkus IM, Skinner CS, Dement J et al. Increasing colorectal cancer screening among individuals in the carpentry trade: Test of risk communication interventions. Prev Med 2005; 40: 489–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Campbell MK, James AS, Hudson MA et al. Improving multiple behaviors for colorectal cancer prevention among African American church members. Health Psychol 2004 September; 23: 492–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Costanza ME, Luckmann R, Stoddard AM, White MJ, Stark JR, Avrunin JS. Using tailored telephone counseling to accelerate the adoption of colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Detect Prev 2007; 31: 191–198.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Basch CE, Wolf RL, Brouse CH et al. Telephone outreach to increase colorectal cancer screening in an urban minority population. Am J Public Health 2006; 96: 2246–2253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schroy PC, III, Glick JT, Robinson PA, Lydotes MA, Evans SR, Emmons KM. Has the surge in media attention increased public awareness about colorectal cancer and screening? J Community Health 2008 February; 33: 1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gollwitzer PM. Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. Am Psychol 1999 July; 54: 493–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Gollwitzer PM, Sheeran P. Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 2006; 38: 69–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Dohan D, Schrag D. Using navigators to improve care of underserved patients: Current practices and approaches. Cancer 2005; 104: 848–855.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. McQueen A, Bartholomew LK, Greisinger AJ et al. Behind Closed Doors: Physician-Patient Discussions About Colorectal Cancer Screening. J Gen Intern Med 2009 September 18; 24: 1228–1235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Klabunde CN, Frame PS, Meadow A, Jones E, Nadel MR, Vernon SW. A national survey of primary care physicians’ colorectal cancer screening recommendations and practices. Prev Med 2003; 36: 352–362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Klabunde CN, Lanier D, Nadel MR, McLeod C, Yuan G, Vernon SW. Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: Recommendations and practices, 2006–2007. Am J Prev Med 2009 July; 37: 8–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lafata JE, Divine G, Moon C, Williams LK. Patient-physician colorectal cancer screening discussions and screening use. Am J Prev Med 2006; 31: 202–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Neugut AI, Lebwohl B. Screening for colorectal cancer: The glass is half full. Am J Public Health 2009 April; 99: 592–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Woolf SH, Jones RM, Rothemich SF, Krist A. The priority is screening, not colonoscopy. Am J Public Health 2009 December; 99: 2117–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lance P. Colorectal cancer screening: Confusion reigns. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 2205–2207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schroy PC, Emmons K, Peters E et al. The impact of a novel computer-based decision aid on shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening: A randomized trial. Med Decis Making 2010 May 18. Available at: URL: http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/05/10/0272989X10369007. Access verified 12/7/2010.

  55. Pignone MP, Harris RP, Kinsinger LS. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening: A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 761–769.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Ruffin MT, Fetters MD, Jimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med 2007 October; 45: 267–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Dolan JG, Frisina S. Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision aid for colorectal cancer screening. Med Decis Making 2002; 22: 125–139.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Prochaska JO, Redding CA, Evers KE. The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, editors. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2008. p. 97–121.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Michie S, Johnston M, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles M. From theory to intervention: Mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol 2008; 57: 660–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Mevissen FEF, Meertens RM, Ruiter RAC, Feenstra H, Schaalma HP. HIV/STI risk communication: The effects of scenario-based risk information and frequency-based risk information on perceived susceptibility to chlamydia and HIV. J Health Psychol 2009; 14: 78–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Suls J, Martin R, Wheeler L. Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect? Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2002; 11: 159–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by National Institutes of Health (RO1 NCI RO1 CA97263).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 2560, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Sally W. Vernon MA, PhD, Leona K. Bartholomew EdD, MPH, Judy L. Bettencourt MPH & Sharon P. Coan MS

  2. Division of Health Behavior Research, School of Medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Amy McQueen PhD

  3. Kelsey Research Foundation, Houston, TX, USA

    Anthony Greisinger PhD

  4. Division of Management, Policy and Community Health, University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX, USA

    David Lairson MA, PhD

  5. Division of Biostatistics, University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX, USA

    Wenyaw Chan PhD

  6. Division of General Medicine, University of Michigan and Ann Arbor VA Health Care System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    S. T. Hawley PhD, MPH

  7. Department of Medical Oncology, Division of Population Science, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    R. E. Myers PhD

Authors
  1. Sally W. Vernon MA, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leona K. Bartholomew EdD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amy McQueen PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Judy L. Bettencourt MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anthony Greisinger PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sharon P. Coan MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David Lairson MA, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wenyaw Chan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. S. T. Hawley PhD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. R. E. Myers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sally W. Vernon MA, PhD.

About this article

Cite this article

Vernon, S.W., Bartholomew, L.K., McQueen, A. et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Tailored Interactive Computer-Delivered Intervention to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening: Sometimes More is Just the Same. ann. behav. med. 41, 284–299 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9258-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9258-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation