Approaching the Hard-to-Reach in Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening: an Overview of Individual, Provider and System Level Coping Strategies
- PMID: 29546218
- PMCID: PMC5690455
- DOI: 10.3934/publichealth.2017.3.289
Approaching the Hard-to-Reach in Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening: an Overview of Individual, Provider and System Level Coping Strategies
Abstract
Background: Despite the proven effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening on reduction of CRC mortality, the uptake of CRC screening remains low. Participation rate is one of determinants for the success of organized population-based screening program. This review aims to identify those who are hard-to-reach, and summarize the strategies to increase their screening rate from individual, provider and system levels.
Methods: A systematic search of electronic English databases was conducted on the factors and strategies of uptake in CRC screening for the hard-to-reach population up to May 2017.
Discussion: The coverage rate and participation rate are two indexes to identify the hard-to-reach population in organized CRC screening program. However, the homeless, new immigrants, people with severe mental illness, the jail intimates, and people with characteristics including lower education levels and/or low socioeconomic status, living in rural/remote areas, without insurance, and racial minorities are usually recognized as hard-to-reach populations. For them, organized screening programs offer a better coverage, while novel invitation approaches for eligible individuals and multiple strategies from primary care physicians are still needed to enhance screening rates among subjects who are hard-to-reach. Suggestions implied the effectiveness of interventions at the system level, including linkages to general practice; use of decision making tools; enlisting supports from coalition; and the continuum from screening to diagnosis and treatment.
Conclusion: Organized CRC screening offers a system access to approach the hard-to-reach populations. To increase their uptake, multiple and novel strategies from individual, provider and system levels should be applied. For policymakers, public healthcare providers and community stakeholders, it is a test to tailor their potential needs and increase their participation rates through continuous efforts to eliminate disparities and inequity in CRC screening service.
Keywords: colorectal cancer; hard-to-reach; participation; screening; uptake.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest in this research.
Similar articles
-
Fecal occult blood test screening uptake among immigrants from Muslim majority countries: A retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada.Cancer Med. 2019 Nov;8(16):7108-7122. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2541. Epub 2019 Sep 30. Cancer Med. 2019. PMID: 31568705 Free PMC article.
-
Prostate cancer disparities in South Carolina: early detection, special programs, and descriptive epidemiology.J S C Med Assoc. 2006 Aug;102(7):241-9. J S C Med Assoc. 2006. PMID: 17319238 Review.
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
Implementing organized colorectal cancer screening programs in Europe-protocol for a systematic review of determinants and strategies.Syst Rev. 2023 Feb 27;12(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s13643-023-02193-6. Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 36849979 Free PMC article.
-
Reducing inequities in colorectal cancer screening in North America.J Carcinog. 2014 Nov 14;13:12. doi: 10.4103/1477-3163.144576. eCollection 2014. J Carcinog. 2014. PMID: 25506266 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Utilizing a Non-Invasive Biomarker for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study.Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2025 Apr;8(4):e70140. doi: 10.1002/cnr2.70140. Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2025. PMID: 40213960 Free PMC article.
-
Acceptability of alternative technologies compared with faecal immunochemical test and/or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review.J Med Screen. 2023 Mar;30(1):14-27. doi: 10.1177/09691413221109999. Epub 2022 Aug 29. J Med Screen. 2023. PMID: 36039489 Free PMC article.
-
Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance in Homeless Patients: A Case Report and Policy Recommendations.Ann Surg Open. 2022 Sep;3(3):e183. doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000183. Epub 2022 Aug 2. Ann Surg Open. 2022. PMID: 36187331 Free PMC article.
-
Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Screening Change in African Americans: Implementation Phase Results of the EPICS Cluster RCT.AJPM Focus. 2023 Jun 13;2(4):100121. doi: 10.1016/j.focus.2023.100121. eCollection 2023 Dec. AJPM Focus. 2023. PMID: 37790949 Free PMC article.
-
Improving uptake of colorectal cancer screening by complex patients at an academic primary care practice: a feasibility study.BMJ Open Qual. 2024 Aug 28;13(3):e002844. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002844. BMJ Open Qual. 2024. PMID: 39209342 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ladabaum U. Colorectal cancer screening. In: Podolsky DK, Camilleri M, Fitz JG, et al., editors. Yamada's textbook of gastroenterology. Sixth Edition ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2016. pp. 1608–1628.
-
- Australian Institute Health Welfare Cancer in australia 2017. 2017;CAN 100
-
- Sano Y, Byeon J, Li X, et al. Colorectal cancer screening of the general population in east asia. Dig Endosc. 2016;28:243–249. - PubMed
-
- Schreuders EH, Ruco A, Rabeneck L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: A global overview of existing programmes. Gut. 2015;64:1637–1649. - PubMed
-
- Koo JH, Leong RWL, Ching J, et al. Knowledge of, attitudes toward, and barriers to participation of colorectal cancer screening tests in the asia-pacific region: A multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:126–135. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources