Literature DB >> 28409270

Getting the first degree relatives to screen for colorectal cancer is harder than it seems-patients' and their first degree relatives' perspectives.

Ker-Kan Tan1,2,3, Tian-Zhi Lim4, Dedrick Kok Hong Chan4, Emily Chew5, Wen-Min Chow5, Nan Luo6, Mee-Lian Wong6, Gerald Choon-Huat Koh6.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: First degree relatives (FDR) of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are at increased risk of CRC compared to the general population. However, screening colonoscopy rates amongst the FDRs remain dismal. The aim of the study was to explore the various issues amongst the patients and their FDR precluding their adoption of screening colonoscopy.
METHODS: A qualitative study of CRC patients and their FDRs was performed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants using open-ended questions until data saturation was achieved. These qualitative data were then thematically analysed.
RESULTS: Fifty CRC patients and thirty-one FDRs were recruited between June 2015 and December 2015. For the patients, three main themes emerged, which include (i) poor understanding of the CRC screening guidelines for their FDRs, (ii) recommendations are lacking amongst medical professionals and (iii) numerous barriers are hindering patients from being advocates for screening colonoscopy for their FDRs. For the FDRs, three main themes emerged. These include (i) poor understanding of the exact CRC screening guidelines amongst the FDRs, (ii) the lack of health promotion efforts amongst medical professionals and (iii) barriers to the uptake of screening colonoscopy such as fear of colonoscopy, high cost of the procedure, its associated inconvenience and perceived invulnerability of the individual.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients and FDRs are not aware of the increased risks of developing CRC amongst the family members. Guidelines regarding screening are also not clearly understood. The numerous barriers that are present amongst the CRC patients and their FDRs can be addressed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Barriers; Colorectal cancer; First degree relatives; Qualitative interviews; Screening

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28409270     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-017-2818-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  8 in total

1.  Authentic qualitative research and the quest for methodological rigour.

Authors:  Franco A Carnevale
Journal:  Can J Nurs Res       Date:  2002-09

2.  Does patient education and recommendation result in increased uptake of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test?

Authors:  Angelia H L Chua; Gerald C H Koh
Journal:  Ann Acad Med Singap       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.473

3.  Equivalency of fecal immunochemical tests and colonoscopy in familial colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Enrique Quintero; Marta Carrillo; Antonio Z Gimeno-García; Manuel Hernández-Guerra; David Nicolás-Pérez; Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu; Maria Luisa Díez-Fuentes; Víctor Abraira
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia among family members of patients with colorectal cancer: a population-based study in Utah.

Authors:  N Jewel Samadder; Karen Curtin; Thérèse M F Tuohy; Kerry G Rowe; Geraldine P Mineau; Ken R Smith; Richard Pimentel; Jathine Wong; Ken Boucher; Randall W Burt
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  Risk of colorectal cancer and adenomas in the families of patients with adenomas: a population-based study in Utah.

Authors:  Thérèse M F Tuohy; Kerry G Rowe; Geraldine P Mineau; Richard Pimentel; Randall W Burt; N Jewel Samadder
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-10-21       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Physician counseling for colorectal cancer screening: impact on patient attitudes, beliefs, and behavior.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Anthony F Jerant; Marlene M von Friederichs-Fitzwater; Daniel J Tancredi; Peter Franks
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.657

7.  A prospective study of family history and the risk of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  C S Fuchs; E L Giovannucci; G A Colditz; D J Hunter; F E Speizer; W C Willett
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-12-22       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Family history is neglected in the work-up of patients with colorectal cancer: a quality assessment using cancer registry data.

Authors:  D A van Dijk; M J Oostindiër; W M Kloosterman-Boele; P Krijnen; H F A Vasen
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.375

  8 in total
  5 in total

1.  Could spouses of colorectal cancer patients possess higher risk of developing colorectal cancer?

Authors:  Ker-Kan Tan; Gerald C H Koh
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Screening in spouses of colorectal cancer patients: a missed opportunity.

Authors:  Ker-Kan Tan; Tian-Zhi Lim; Emily Chew; Wen-Min Chow; Nan Luo; Mee-Lian Wong; Gerald Choon-Huat Koh
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Examining intrafamilial communication of colorectal cancer risk status to family members and kin responses to colonoscopy: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Kaitlin M McGarragle; Crystal Hare; Spring Holter; Dorian Anglin Facey; Kelly McShane; Steven Gallinger; Tae L Hart
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2019-06-26       Impact factor: 2.857

4.  Cancer Screening Knowledge and Behavior in a Multi-Ethnic Asian Population: The Singapore Community Health Study.

Authors:  Tyson Kin-Chung Chan; Linda Wei Lin Tan; Rob M van Dam; Wei Jie Seow
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 5.  A risk scoring system to predict the individual incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jialin Gu; Yan Li; Jialin Yu; Miao Hu; Yi Ji; Lingchang Li; Canhong Hu; Guoli Wei; Jiege Huo
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-01-29       Impact factor: 4.430

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.