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
. 2012 Oct 9;107(8):1295-301.
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.386. Epub 2012 Sep 6.

Quality of life in participants of a CRC screening program

Affiliations

Quality of life in participants of a CRC screening program

A Kapidzic et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: Little is known about the effect of participating in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme on quality of life (QOL), neither for participants with a negative nor for those with a positive test result. These findings, however, are important to evaluate the impact of CRC screening.

Methods: Participants from CRC screening trials were sent a questionnaire, which included validated measures on generic health-related QOL, generic anxiety and screen-specific anxiety. Both faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) participants, either with negative or positive test results, were addressed.

Results: The response rate was 73% (1289 out of 1772) for FIT and 78% (536 out of 689) for FS participants, with mean ages varying from 63-66 years. Positive FIT participants had worse physical (PCS-12, 47.1 vs 48.3, P=0.02), but equal mental QOL scores (MCS-12, 51.1 vs 51.6, P=0.26). Positive and negative FS participants had similar QOL scores. Both FIT and FS participants with a positive test result reported more screen-specific anxiety than negative FIT and FS participants. Positive and negative FS participants had similar generic anxiety scores.

Conclusion: Our findings indicate that the burden of participating in CRC screening may be limited. Conducting a prospective study to confirm these results is recommended.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of study responders.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scores on the advice subjects would give and willingness to return. Using a 5-point Likert scale (0–100 scale): scores on the advice subjects would give others to participate in screening and willingness of screenees to return for successive screening rounds.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover JM, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J Investigators, U.K.F.S.T. (2010) Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 375: 1624–1633 - PubMed
    1. Brasso K, Ladelund S, Frederiksen BL, Jorgensen T (2010) Psychological distress following fecal occult blood test in colorectal cancer screening–a population-based study. Scand J Gastroenterol 45: 1211–1216 - PubMed
    1. Center MM, Jemal A, Smith RA, Ward E (2009) Worldwide variations in colorectal cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 59: 366–378 - PubMed
    1. Dolan P (1997) Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 35: 1095–1108 - PubMed
    1. Essink-Bot ML, de Koning HJ, Nijs HG, Kirkels WJ, van der Maas PJ, Schroder FH (1998) Short-term effects of population-based screening for prostate cancer on health-related quality of life. J Natl Cancer Inst 90: 925–931 - PubMed