Comparison of mailed invitation strategies to improve fecal occult blood test participation in men: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Trials

Deborah Turnbull³  Carlene Wilson¹  Benjamin JR Stewart³  Ingrid Flight²  Ian Zajac²  Amy Duncan³ 

[1]Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Bedford Park 5042, South Australia, Australia

[2]Preventative Health Flagship, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Adelaide 5000, South Australia, Australia

[3]School of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, South Australia, Australia

关键词: Psychological factors;    Protocol;    Randomized controlled trial;    Male;    Mass screening methods;    Colorectal neoplasm;   

Others  :  1093305
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-14-239

 received in 2013-04-24, accepted in 2013-07-05,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Men have a significantly increased risk of being diagnosed with, and dying from, colorectal cancer (CRC) than women. Men also participate in fecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening at a lower rate than women. This study will determine whether strategies that target men’s attitudes toward screening, and matched to stage of readiness to screen, increase men’s FOBT participation compared to a standard approach.

Methods/Design

Eligible trial participants will be a national sample of 9,200 men aged 50 to 74 years, living in urban Australia and randomly selected from the Australian electoral roll. Trial participants will be mailed an advance notification letter, followed 2 weeks later by an invitation letter and a free fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit. The intervention is a factorial design, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with four trial arms, including a control. The content of the advance notification and invitation letters will differ by trial arm as follows: 1) standard advance notification and standard invitation (control arm); 2) targeted advance notification and standard invitation; 3) standard advance notification and targeted invitation; and 4) targeted advance notification and targeted invitation. The standard letters will replicate as closely as possible the letters included in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Modified advance notification and invitation letters will incorporate additional messages to target men in the precontemplation (advance notification) and contemplation stages (invitation). The primary outcome is return of the completed FIT within 12 weeks of invitation. Analysts will be blinded to trial assignment and participants will be blinded to the use of varying invitational materials. Subsamples from each trial arm will complete baseline and endpoint surveys to measure the psychological impact of the intervention, and qualitative interviews will be conducted to evaluate attitudes toward the intervention.

Discussion

The outcomes of this study will have implications for the way FOBT screening is offered to men. Findings will help to identify how invitations for men to screen should be framed and delivered in order to maximize participation.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612001122842

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Duncan et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D: Global cancer statistics. CA: Cancer J Clin 2011, 61(2):69-90.
• [2]Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: Cancer in Australia: An Overview, 2010. Cancer series no. 60. Cat. no. CAN 56. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2010.
• [3]Australian Cancer Network Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Revision Committee: Guidelines for the Prevention, Early Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer. Sydney: Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network; 2005.
• [4]Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: Bowel Cancer for Australia, ICD10 C18-C20. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2012.
• [5]Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L: Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103(6):1541-1549.
• [6]Benson VS, Patnick J, Davies AK, Nadel MR, Smith RA, Atkin WS, International Colorectal Cancer Screening Network: Colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of 35 initiatives in 17 countries. Int J Cancer 2008, 122(6):1357-1367.
• [7]National Bowel Cancer Screening Program http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/ webcite
• [8]Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing: National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: Annual Monitoring Report 2009 Data Supplement 2010. Cancer series no. 57. Cat. no. CAN 53. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2010.
• [9]Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing: National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: Monitoring Report 2007. Cancer series no. 40. Cat. no. CAN 35. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2008.
• [10]Seeff LC, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, Thompson T, Shapiro JA, Vernon SW, Coates RJ: Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. Cancer 2004, 100:2093-2103.
• [11]Ananthakrishnan AN, Schellhase KG, Sparapani RA, Laud PW, Neuner JM: Disparities in colon cancer screening in the Medicare population. Arch Intern Med 2007, 167(3):258-264.
• [12]Ko HH, Zhang H, Telford JJ, Enns R: Factors influencing patient satisfaction when undergoing endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2009, 69(4):883-891.
• [13]Singh SM, Paszat LF, Li C, He J, Vinden C, Rabeneck L: Association of socioeconomic status and receipt of colorectal cancer investigations: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Can Med Assoc J 2004, 171(5):461-465.
• [14]Ioannou GN, Chapko MK, Dominitz JA: Predictors of colorectal cancer screening participation in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol 2003, 98(9):2082-2091.
• [15]Frederiksen BL, Jorgensen T, Brasso K, Holten I, Osler M: Socioeconomic position and participation in colorectal cancer screening. Br J Cancer 2010, 103(10):1496-1501.
• [16]Janz M, Becker M: The health belief model: a decade later. Health Educ Q 1984, 11:1-47.
• [17]Ajzen I: The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991, 50(2):179-211.
• [18]Myers RE, Hyslop T, Sifri R, Bittner-Fagan H, Katurakes N, Cocroft J, DiCarlo M, Wolf T: Tailored navigation in colorectal cancer screening. Med Care 2008, 46(9 Suppl 1):123-131.
• [19]Kiviniemi MT, Bennett A, Zaiter M, Marshall JR: Individual-level factors in colorectal cancer screening: a review of the literature on the relation of individual-level health behavior constructs and screening behavior. Psychooncology 2011, 20(10):1023-1033.
• [20]Duncan A, Turnbull D, Gregory T, Cole SR, Young G, Flight I, Wilson C: Using the transtheoretical model of behaviour change to describe readiness to rescreen for colorectal cancer with faecal occult blood testing. Health Promot J Austr 2012, 23(2):122-128.
• [21]Gregory T, Wilson C, Duncan A, Turnbull D, Cole SR, Young GP: Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer. BMC Public Health 2011, 11(1):38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]McQueen A, Vernon SW, Meissner HI, Klabunde CN, Rakowski W: Are there gender differences in colorectal cancer test use prevalence and correlates? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006, 15(4):782-791.
• [23]Brawarsky P, Brooks DR, Mucci LA: Correlates of colorectal cancer testing in Massachusetts men and women. Prev Med 2003, 36(6):659-668.
• [24]Myers RE, Ross E, Jepson C, Wolf T, Balshem A, Millner L, Leventhal H: Modeling adherence to colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med 1994, 23(2):142-151.
• [25]Sohl SJ, Moyer A: Tailored interventions to promote mammography screening: a meta-analytic review. Prev Med 2007, 45(4):252-261.
• [26]Rawl SM, Menon U, Burness A, Breslau ES: Interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening: an integrative review. Nurs Outlook 2012, 60(4):172-181.
• [27]Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC: Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983, 51(3):390-395.
• [28]Spencer L, Pagell F, Adams T: Applying the transtheoretical model to cancer screening behaviour. Am J Health Behav 2005, 29(1):36-56.
• [29]Menon U, Belue R, Skinner C, Rothwell B, Champion V: Perceptions of colon cancer screening by stage of screening test adoption. Cancer Nurs 2007, 30(3):178-185.
• [30]Paddison JS, Yip MJ: Exploratory study examining barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Aust J Rural Health 2010, 18(1):11-15.
• [31]Manne SL, Markowitz A, Winawer S, Meropol NJ, Haller D, Rakowski W, Babb J, Jandorf L: Correlates of colorectal cancer screening compliance and stage of adoption among siblings of individuals with early onset colorectal cancer. Health Psychol 2002, 21(1):3-15.
• [32]Swan H, Siddiqui A, Myers RE: International colorectal cancer screening programs: population contact strategies, testing methods and screening rates. Practical Gastroenterology 2012, 36(8):20-29.
• [33]Kafrouni MI, Kwon JH: Fecal occult blood test. In Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer Series: Colorectal Cancer. Edited by Gearhart S, Ahuja N. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2011:75-81.
• [34]Cole SR, Smith A, Wilson C, Turnbull D, Esterman A, Young GP: An advance notification letter increases participation in colorectal cancer screening. J Med Screen 2007, 14(2):73-75.
• [35]Saghaei M: Random allocation software for parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 2004, 4(1):26. BioMed Central Full Text
• [36]Wilson C, Flight I, Zajac I, Turnbull D, Young G, Cole S, Gregory T: Protocol for population testing of an Internet-based Personalised Decision Support system for colorectal cancer screening. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2010, 10(1):50. BioMed Central Full Text
• [37]Rawl S, Champion V, Menon U, Loehrer PJ, Vance GH, Skinner CS: Validation of scales to measure benefits of and barriers to colorectal cancer screening. J Psychosoc Oncol 2001, 19(3–4):47-63.
• [38]Flight I, Wilson C, McGillivray J, Myers RE: Cross-cultural validation of the preventive health model for colorectal cancer screening: an Australian study. Health Educ Behav 2010, 37(5):724-736.
• [39]Shakespeare-Finch J, Obst PL: The development of the 2-way social support scale: a measure of giving and receiving emotional and instrumental support. J Pers Assess 2011, 93(5):483-490.
• [40]Rozen P, Young G, Levin B, Spann S: Colorectal Cancer in Clinical Practice: Prevention, Early Detection and Management. 2nd edition. London: Taylor & Francis; 2006.
• [41]National Cancer Institute: Making health communication programs work. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/cancerlibrary/pinkbook/page1 webcite
• [42]Cho H: (Ed): Health Communication Message Design. Los Angeles: Sage; 2012.
• [43]Witte K, Meyer G, Martell D: Effective Health Risk Messages: A Step-by-Step Guide. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2001.
• [44]Maibach E, Parrott RL: Designing Health Messages: Approaches from Communication Theory and Public Health Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1995.
• [45]Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative Methods for Health Research. 2nd edition. Los Angeles: Sage; 2010.
• [46]Vernon SW, Meissner H, Klabunde C, Rimer BK, Ahnen DJ, Bastani R, Mandelson MT, Nadel MR, Sheinfeld-Gorin S, Zapka J: Measures for ascertaining use of colorectal cancer screening in behavioral, health services, and epidemiologic research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004, 13:898-905.