Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Mar;7(1):51-60.
doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00252.x.

Perspectives on colorectal cancer screening: a focus group study

Affiliations

Perspectives on colorectal cancer screening: a focus group study

Vivek Goel et al. Health Expect. 2004 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: To assess attitudes and acceptability of Ontario consumers and doctors towards colorectal screening with faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and colonoscopy.

Design, setting and participants: Focus groups with gender-specific samples of the population, high-risk gastroenterology patients and family doctors.

Method: Semi-structured interview guides used by facilitator to lead groups through knowledge of risk factors and prevention of colorectal cancer, the screening modalities, requirements for implementing screening programmes, barriers to screening and preferences towards screening.

Main findings: There were low levels of knowledge about colorectal cancer and its prevention in the general population. FOBT was an acceptable screening modality, but considerable education about its use and benefits would be necessary to implement a screening programme. Colonoscopy was not perceived to be a good choice for a primary screen in the general population. The high-risk group supported use of FOBT in the general population and emphasized the need for education. The doctors were more reluctant about screening, requesting clear guidelines. They also identified the time and resources that would be required if a screening programme were initiated.

Conclusion: While colorectal screening is acceptable in this sample, information and decision aids are required to enable consumers and providers to make effective decisions. Implementation of colorectal screening programmes requires substantial educational efforts for both consumers and doctors.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Towler B, Irwig B, Glasziou P, Kewenter J, Weller D, Silagy C. A systematic review of the effects of screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. British Medical Journal, 1998; 317: 559–565. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care . Colorectal cancer screening: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 2001; 165: 206–208. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer, 2003. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2003; 53: 27–43. - PubMed
    1. Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale‐update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 544–560. - PubMed
    1. Preventive Services Task Force . Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: Report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, 2nd edn Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1996.

Publication types