Elsevier

Preventive Medicine

Volume 36, Issue 1, January 2003, Pages 85-91
Preventive Medicine

Regular Article
Correlates of Underutilization of Colorectal Cancer Screening among U.S. Adults, Age 50 Years and Older

https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2002.1127Get rights and content

Abstract

Background.Although effective screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) exists, only 37% of incident CRC are diagnosed at a localized stage at which treatment is effective. We identified demographic and other characteristics of adults (≧50 years old) who reported no CRC screening.

Methods. We calculated the prevalence of never having had a fecal occult blood test and/or a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy by age, sex, and other factors using the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data.

Results. CRC screening tests were underutilized across all segments of the population. Underutilization was highest in persons aged 50–64 years and those with lower education and a lack of health insurance and preventive services.

Conclusions. The data indicate that large proportions of average-risk adults across various sociodemographics and behavioral factors are not utilizing recommended CRC screening tests. There is a need to increase the awareness of the importance of utilizing effective CRC screening tests for the early detection of colorectal cancers.

References (38)

  • S Winawer et al.

    Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale

    Gastroenterology

    (1997)
  • S Scheitel et al.

    Colorectal cancer screening: a community case-control study of proctosigmoidoscopy, barium enema radiography, and fecal occult blood test efficacy

    Mayo Clinic Proc

    (1999)
  • R Greenlee et al.

    Cancer statistics

    CA A Cancer J Clin

    (2001)
  • J Mandel et al.

    Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (1999)
  • J Mandel et al.

    The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer

    N Engl J Med

    (2000)
  • S Winawer et al.

    Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy: The National Polyp Study Workgroup

    N Engl J Med

    (1993)
  • Guide to clinical preventive services

    (1999)
  • T Byers et al.

    American Cancer Society guidelines for screening and surveillance for early detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: update 1997

    CA A Cancer J Clinicians

    (1997)
  • R Smith et al.

    American Cancer Society Guidelines for the early detection of cancer: update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal and endometrial cancers

    CA A Cancer J Clin

    (2001)
  • Ries, L, Kosary, C, Hankey, B, SEER cancer statistics review, 1973–1992 (tables and graphs), Bethesda, MD, National...
  • S Vernon

    Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review

    J Natl Cancer Insti

    (1997)
  • MMWR

    (1999)
  • MMWR

    (2001)
  • Nelson, D, Condon, K. Objectives and design of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. American Statistical...
  • Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System CD-ROM, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,...
  • SAS Systems, A Computer Program V, Cary, NSII,...
  • B Shah et al.

    SUDAAN user's manual R

    (1997)
  • J Preisser et al.

    Physician and patient predictors of health maintenance visits

    Arch Fam Med

    (1998)
  • Cited by (143)

    • Health Care Provider Characteristics Associated With Colorectal Cancer Screening Preferences and Use

      2022, Mayo Clinic Proceedings
      Citation Excerpt :

      The availability and recommendation of multiple CRC screening modalities with differences in effectiveness, cost, risk, and patient acceptability highlights the critical need for HCPs to provide patients with accurate information about all available options to support informed choice and shared decision-making. Prior research has consistently shown that clinician recommendation is a key determinant of CRC screening.10-12 Our findings suggest that, to some extent, clinicians are attentive to the CRC screening needs and preferences of their patients.

    • Primary care clinicians’ perceptions of colorectal cancer screening tests for older adults

      2021, Preventive Medicine Reports
      Citation Excerpt :

      In the United States, large-scale screening programs have led to a significant decrease in CRC mortality (Siegel et al., 2017; Arnold et al., 2017). However, CRC screening of older adults remains challenging with literature showing that both under- and over-screening exist (Cokkinides et al., 2003; Seeff et al., 2002; Predmore et al., 2018). Appropriate CRC screening in older adults requires balancing the long-term benefits of screening with significant, often short-term, harms and communicating these benefits and harms with patients so they can make informed decisions (Kotwal and Schonberg, 2017).

    • Out of reach? Correlates of cervical cancer underscreening in women with varying levels of healthcare interactions in a United States integrated delivery system

      2021, Preventive Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Addressing barriers common among people who have these correlates of underscreening could enhance the effectiveness of future portal- or PCP-based interventions. Underscreening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening have been linked in many studies, (Schueler et al., 2008; Schoenberg et al., 2013; Cokkinides et al., 2003; Meissner et al., 2006; Carlos et al., 2004) including settings with organized screening programs. ( McCowan et al., 2019; Sicsic and Franc, 2014) Cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer underscreening share common correlates, including Black/African-American race, (Schueler et al., 2008; Pollack et al., 2006) Hispanic ethnicity, (White, 2017) lower education, (White, 2017; Cokkinides et al., 2003; Pollack et al., 2006) lower income, (White, 2017; McCowan et al., 2019) obesity, (Wee et al., 2000; Ferrante et al., 2006) and lack of recent health care visits (Hall et al., 2019) and provider recommendations. (

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    To whom correspondence and reprint request should be addressed at the Department of Epidemiology and Surveillance, American Cancer Society–National Home Office, 1599 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329. Fax: (404) 327-7450. E-mail: [email protected].

    View full text