Gram Emma Grundtvig, Á Rogvi Jessica, Siersma Volkert, Nicolaisdottir Dagny Ros, Brodersen John Brandt
Centre for General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
The Research Unit for General Practice, Region Zealand, Copenhagen, Denmark.
BMJ Open. 2025 May 16;15(5):e090967. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090967.
Receiving a false positive in colorectal cancer screening is associated with psychosocial consequences, yet the reasons why some people are more affected than others remain unclear. This study examines the association between sociodemographic factors and psychosocial consequences among screening participants with false positives in colorectal cancer screening.
Prospective cohort study.
1432 screening participants with positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening with a follow-up colonoscopy with either no abnormalities or benign polyps (low or medium-high risk).
We measured psychosocial consequences with the Consequences Of Screening - ColoRectal Cancer (COS-CRC) questionnaire, after the positive FIT but before the follow-up colonoscopy and again 1 year later. Sociodemographic factors were obtained from national registers and included sex, age, urbanicity, educational level, occupational status, income, assets, cohabitation status and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Psychosocial consequences were measured before colonoscopy (baseline) and 1 year after, and sociodemographic factors were assessed at baseline.
We tested 19×2×3=114 associations between the sociodemographic factors and psychosocial consequences within the three groups of false positives and five associations were significant. We found that for participants with medium- and high-risk polyps, experiencing short-term psychosocial consequences was significantly associated with having a university degree compared with secondary school (OR=5.04 (1.38; 18.37), p=0.0142) and being unemployed compared with being employed (OR=5.61 (1.42; 22.14), p=0.0139). For participants with low-risk polyps, long-term consequences were significantly associated with the mid-income quartile (OR=2.32 (1.13; 4.76), p=0.0224) and the highest income quartile (OR=5.47 (1.13; 26.48), p=0.0349) compared with the lowest quartile. For participants with no abnormalities, there was an association between short-term psychosocial consequences and having comorbidities compared with none (OR=2.95 (1.13; 7.71), p=0.0277).
This study found few significant associations between psychosocial consequences and sociodemographic factors and with no apparent pattern in these. This suggests no strong evidence that specific sociodemographic groups should be especially vulnerable to experiencing psychosocial consequences after a false-positive result from colorectal cancer screening. Thus, there is currently weak evidence for identifying screening participants at higher risk for psychosocial consequences and developing targeted interventions to reduce psychosocial consequences.
在结直肠癌筛查中收到假阳性结果会带来心理社会方面的后果,但为何有些人比其他人受影响更大,原因尚不清楚。本研究探讨结直肠癌筛查中出现假阳性结果的参与者的社会人口学因素与心理社会后果之间的关联。
前瞻性队列研究。
1432名粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)筛查呈阳性的参与者,随后进行了结肠镜检查,结果显示无异常或为良性息肉(低风险或中高风险)。
我们使用结直肠癌筛查后果(COS-CRC)问卷来衡量心理社会后果,在FIT呈阳性后但在后续结肠镜检查之前以及1年后再次进行测量。社会人口学因素从国家登记处获取,包括性别、年龄、城市化程度、教育水平、职业状况、收入、资产、同居状况和Charlson合并症指数。心理社会后果在结肠镜检查前(基线)和1年后进行测量,社会人口学因素在基线时进行评估。
我们在三组假阳性结果中测试了19×2×3 = 114个社会人口学因素与心理社会后果之间的关联,其中5个关联具有显著性。我们发现,对于患有中高风险息肉的参与者,与中学学历相比,拥有大学学历会使经历短期心理社会后果的可能性显著增加(比值比[OR]=5.04[1.38;18.37],p = 0.0142),与就业相比,失业会使这种可能性显著增加(OR = 5.61[1.42;22.14],p = 0.0139)。对于患有低风险息肉的参与者,与最低收入四分位数相比,中等收入四分位数(OR = 2.32[1.13;4.76],p = 0.0224)和最高收入四分位数(OR = 5.47[1.13;26.48],p = 0.0349)与长期后果显著相关。对于无异常的参与者,与无合并症相比,有合并症与短期心理社会后果之间存在关联(OR = 2.95[1.13;7.71],p = 0.0277)。
本研究发现心理社会后果与社会人口学因素之间几乎没有显著关联,且无明显模式。这表明没有强有力的证据表明特定的社会人口学群体在结直肠癌筛查出现假阳性结果后特别容易经历心理社会后果。因此,目前几乎没有证据可用于识别心理社会后果风险较高的筛查参与者并制定针对性干预措施以减轻心理社会后果。