Giorgi Rossi Paolo, Federici Antonio, Bartolozzi Francesco, Farchi Sara, Borgia Piero, Guasticchi Gabriella
Agency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Via di S. Costanza, 53 Rome, 00198, Italy.
BMC Public Health. 2005 Dec 22;5:139. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-5-139.
The major limit to colorectal cancer screening effectiveness is often low compliance. We studied the reasons for non compliance and determinants of compliance to faecal occult blood tests in Lazio, Italy.
This is a case-control study nested within a trial that tested the effect of type of test and provider on colorectal cancer screening compliance. Non compliant trial subjects were classified as cases, and compliant subjects were classified as controls. We sampled 600 cases and 600 controls matched by their general practitioner, half were invited for screening at the hospital, and the other half directly at their general practitioner's office. Cases and controls answered questions on: distance from test provider, logistical problems, perception of colorectal cancer risk, confidence in screening efficacy, fear of results, presence of colorectal cancer in the family, and gastrointestinal symptoms.
About 31% of cases never received the letter offering free screening, and 17% of the sampled population had already been screened. The first reported reason for non-compliance was "lack of time" (30%); the major determinant of compliance was the distance from the test provider: odds ratio > 30 minutes vs < 15 minutes 0.3 (95% CI = 0.2-0.7). The odds ratio for lack of time was 0.16 (95% IC 0.1-0.26). The effect was stronger if the hospital (0.03 95% CI = 0.01-0.1) rather than the general practitioner (0.3 95% CI = 0.2-0.6) was the provider. Twenty-two percent of controls were accompanied by someone to the test.
To increase compliance, screening programmes must involve test providers who are geographically close to the target population.
结直肠癌筛查效果的主要限制因素通常是依从性低。我们研究了意大利拉齐奥地区粪便潜血试验不依从的原因及依从性的决定因素。
这是一项嵌套在试验中的病例对照研究,该试验测试了检测类型和检测机构对结直肠癌筛查依从性的影响。不依从的试验对象被归类为病例,依从的对象被归类为对照。我们抽取了600例病例和600例对照,由他们的全科医生进行匹配,一半被邀请到医院进行筛查,另一半直接在他们的全科医生办公室进行筛查。病例和对照回答了以下问题:与检测机构的距离、后勤问题、对结直肠癌风险的认知、对筛查效果的信心、对结果的恐惧、家族中是否存在结直肠癌以及胃肠道症状。
约31%的病例从未收到提供免费筛查的信件,17%的抽样人群已经接受过筛查。首次报告的不依从原因是“没有时间”(30%);依从性的主要决定因素是与检测机构的距离:与距离检测机构小于15分钟相比,距离大于30分钟的比值比为0.3(95%可信区间=0.2-0.7)。没有时间的比值比为0.16(95%可信区间0.1-0.26)。如果检测机构是医院(0.03,95%可信区间=0.01-0.1)而不是全科医生(0.3,95%可信区间=0.2-0.6),这种影响更强。22%的对照有人陪同进行检测。
为了提高依从性,筛查项目必须包括在地理位置上接近目标人群的检测机构。