J A Shapiro1, L C Seeff, M R Nadel. 1. Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality. We analyzed national survey data to determine rates of use of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy, and to determine if these rates differ by demographic factors and other health behaviors. METHODS: A total of 52,754 respondents aged >or=50 years were questioned in the 1997 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey (a random-digit-dialing telephone survey of the non-institutionalized U.S. population) about their use of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy. RESULTS: The age-adjusted proportion of respondents who reported having had a colorectal cancer screening test during the recommended time interval (past year for FOBT and past 5 years for sigmoidoscopy) was 19.8% for FOBT, 30.5% for sigmoidoscopy, and 41.1% for either FOBT or sigmoidoscopy. Rates of use of colorectal cancer screening tests were higher for those who had other screening tests (mammography, Papanicolaou smear, and cholesterol check). There were also differences in rates of use of colorectal cancer screening tests according to other health behaviors (smoking, seat belt use, fruit and vegetable intake, and physical activity) and several demographic factors. However, none of the subgroups that we examined reported a rate of FOBT use above 29% within the past year or a rate of sigmoidoscopy use above 41% within the past 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: While rates of use of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy were higher among people who practiced other healthy behaviors, rates of use were still quite low in all subgroups. There is a need for increased awareness of the importance of colorectal cancer screening.
BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality. We analyzed national survey data to determine rates of use of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy, and to determine if these rates differ by demographic factors and other health behaviors. METHODS: A total of 52,754 respondents aged >or=50 years were questioned in the 1997 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey (a random-digit-dialing telephone survey of the non-institutionalized U.S. population) about their use of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy. RESULTS: The age-adjusted proportion of respondents who reported having had a colorectal cancer screening test during the recommended time interval (past year for FOBT and past 5 years for sigmoidoscopy) was 19.8% for FOBT, 30.5% for sigmoidoscopy, and 41.1% for either FOBT or sigmoidoscopy. Rates of use of colorectal cancer screening tests were higher for those who had other screening tests (mammography, Papanicolaou smear, and cholesterol check). There were also differences in rates of use of colorectal cancer screening tests according to other health behaviors (smoking, seat belt use, fruit and vegetable intake, and physical activity) and several demographic factors. However, none of the subgroups that we examined reported a rate of FOBT use above 29% within the past year or a rate of sigmoidoscopy use above 41% within the past 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: While rates of use of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy were higher among people who practiced other healthy behaviors, rates of use were still quite low in all subgroups. There is a need for increased awareness of the importance of colorectal cancer screening.
Authors: David M Mosen; Adrianne C Feldstein; Nancy Perrin; A Gabriela Rosales; David H Smith; Elizabeth G Liles; Jennifer L Schneider; Jennifer E Lafata; Ronald E Myers; Michael Kositch; Thomas Hickey; Russell E Glasgow Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Charles E Basch; Randi L Wolf; Corey H Brouse; Celia Shmukler; Alfred Neugut; Lawrence T DeCarlo; Steven Shea Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lucile L Adams-Campbell; Kepher Makambi; Charles P Mouton; Julie R Palmer; Lynn Rosenberg Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 1.798
Authors: Lila J Finney Rutten; Robert M Jacobson; Patrick M Wilson; Debra J Jacobson; Chun Fan; John B Kisiel; Seth Sweetser; Sidna M Tulledge-Scheitel; Jennifer L St Sauver Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Neeraja B Peterson; Kathleen A Dwyer; Shelagh A Mulvaney; Mary S Dietrich; Russell L Rothman Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 1.798
Authors: Richard G Roetzheim; Lisa K Christman; Paul B Jacobsen; Alan B Cantor; Jennifer Schroeder; Rania Abdulla; Seft Hunter; Thomas N Chirikos; Jeffrey P Krischer Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Mira L Katz; Paul L Reiter; Gregory S Young; Michael L Pennell; Cathy M Tatum; Electra D Paskett Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 4.254