Literature DB >> 23979875

Preferences for colorectal cancer screening techniques and intention to attend: a multi-criteria decision analysis.

J Marjan Hummel1, Lotte G M Steuten, C J M Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Nick Mulder, Maarten J Ijzerman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the expected health benefits of colorectal cancer screening programs, participation rates remain low in countries that have implemented such a screening program. The perceived benefits and risks of the colorectal cancer screening technique are likely to influence the decision to attend the screening program. Besides the diagnostic accuracy and the risks of the screening technique, which can affect the health of the participants, additional factors, such as the burden of the test, may impact the individuals' decisions to participate. To maximise the participation rate of a screening program for a new colorectal cancer program in the Netherlands, it is important to know the preferences of the screening population for alternative screening techniques.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of preferences for particular attributes of the screening tests on the intention to attend a colorectal cancer screening program.
METHODS: We used a web-based questionnaire to elicit the preferences of the target population for a selection of colon-screening techniques. The target population consisted of Dutch men and women aged 55-75 years. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a technique for multi-criteria analysis, was used to estimate the colorectal cancer screening preferences. Respondents weighted the relevance of five criteria, i.e. the attributes of the screening techniques: sensitivity, specificity, safety, inconvenience, and frequency of the test. With regard to these criteria, preferences were estimated between four alternative screening techniques, namely, immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT), colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and computerized tomographic (CT) colonography. A five-point ordinal scale was used to estimate the respondents' intention to attend the screening. We conducted a correlation analysis on the preferences for the screening techniques and the intention to attend.
RESULTS: We included 167 respondents who were consistent in their judgments of the relevance of the criteria and their preferences for the screening techniques. The most preferred screening method for the national screening program was CT colonography. Sensitivity (weight = 0.26) and safety (weight = 0.26) were the strongest determinants of the overall preferences for the screening techniques. However, the screening test with the highest intention to attend was iFOBT. Inconvenience (correlation [r] = 0.69), safety (r = 0.58), and the frequency of the test (r = 0.58) were most strongly related to intention to attend.
CONCLUSIONS: The multi-criteria decision analysis revealed the attributes of the screening techniques that are most important so as to increase intention to participate in a screening program. Even though the respondents may recognize the high importance of diagnostic effectiveness in the long term, their short-term decision to attend the screening tests may be less driven by this consideration. Our analysis suggests that inconvenience, safety, and frequency of the test are the strongest technique-related determinants of the respondents' intention to participate in colorectal screening programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23979875     DOI: 10.1007/s40258-013-0051-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  8 in total

1.  How Well Can Analytic Hierarchy Process be Used to Elicit Individual Preferences? Insights from a Survey in Patients Suffering from Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Marion Danner; Vera Vennedey; Mickaël Hiligsmann; Sascha Fauser; Christian Gross; Stephanie Stock
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Comparison of patient preferences for fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy using the analytic hierarchy process.

Authors:  Yinghui Xu; Barcey T Levy; Jeanette M Daly; George R Bergus; Jeffrey C Dunkelberg
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  Patients' Preferences for Primary Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Survey of the National Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Korea.

Authors:  Young-Hak Cho; Dae Ho Kim; Jae Myung Cha; Yoon Tae Jeen; Jeong Seop Moon; Jin-Oh Kim; Sang Kil Lee; Yu Kyung Cho; Jong Pil Im; Jae Young Jang; Jeong Eun Shin; Soon Man Yoon; Yunho Jung; Eun Sun Kim; Kang Nyeong Lee; Soo-Jeong Cho; Yeol Kim; Bo Young Park
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 4.519

4.  Determinants of (non-)attendance at the Dutch cancer screening programmes: A systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas Hg Bongaerts; Frederike L Büchner; Barend Jc Middelkoop; Onno R Guicherit; Mattijs E Numans
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 2.136

5.  Patient preferences for whole-body MRI or conventional staging pathways in lung and colorectal cancer: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Anne Miles; Stuart A Taylor; Ruth E C Evans; Steve Halligan; Sandy Beare; John Bridgewater; Vicky Goh; Sam Janes; Neil Navani; Alf Oliver; Alison Morton; Andrea Rockall; Caroline S Clarke; Stephen Morris
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care-Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy Process Survey.

Authors:  Wiebke Mohr; Anika Rädke; Adel Afi; Franka Mühlichen; Moritz Platen; Annelie Scharf; Bernhard Michalowsky; Wolfgang Hoffmann
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 4.614

7.  Including the public perspective in health-related MCDA: ideas from the field of public opinion research and polling.

Authors:  Gillian K SteelFisher
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2018-11-09

8.  Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in health care: a systematic review of the main characteristics and methodological steps.

Authors:  Talita D C Frazão; Deyse G G Camilo; Eric L S Cabral; Ricardo P Souza
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 2.796

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.