Preferences for colorectal cancer screening techniques and intention to attend: A multi-criteria decision analysis

被引:23
作者
Hummel J.M. [1 ]
Steuten L.G.M. [1 ]
Groothuis-Oudshoorn C.J.M. [1 ]
Mulder N. [1 ]
Ijzerman M.J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Health Technology and Services Research, MIRA, University of Twente, 7500 AE Enschede
关键词
Analytic Hierarchy Process; Computerize Tomographic Colonography; Colorectal Cancer Screening; Screening Technique; Median Correlation;
D O I
10.1007/s40258-013-0051-z
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Despite the expected health benefits of colorectal cancer screening programs, participation rates remain low in countries that have implemented such a screening program. The perceived benefits and risks of the colorectal cancer screening technique are likely to influence the decision to attend the screening program. Besides the diagnostic accuracy and the risks of the screening technique, which can affect the health of the participants, additional factors, such as the burden of the test, may impact the individuals' decisions to participate. To maximise the participation rate of a screening program for a new colorectal cancer program in the Netherlands, it is important to know the preferences of the screening population for alternative screening techniques. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of preferences for particular attributes of the screening tests on the intention to attend a colorectal cancer screening program. Methods: We used a web-based questionnaire to elicit the preferences of the target population for a selection of colon-screening techniques. The target population consisted of Dutch men and women aged 55-75 years. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a technique for multi-criteria analysis, was used to estimate the colorectal cancer screening preferences. Respondents weighted the relevance of five criteria, i.e. the attributes of the screening techniques: sensitivity, specificity, safety, inconvenience, and frequency of the test. With regard to these criteria, preferences were estimated between four alternative screening techniques, namely, immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT), colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and computerized tomographic (CT) colonography. A five-point ordinal scale was used to estimate the respondents' intention to attend the screening. We conducted a correlation analysis on the preferences for the screening techniques and the intention to attend. Results: We included 167 respondents who were consistent in their judgments of the relevance of the criteria and their preferences for the screening techniques. The most preferred screening method for the national screening program was CT colonography. Sensitivity (weight = 0.26) and safety (weight = 0.26) were the strongest determinants of the overall preferences for the screening techniques. However, the screening test with the highest intention to attend was iFOBT. Inconvenience (correlation [r] = 0.69), safety (r = 0.58), and the frequency of the test (r = 0.58) were most strongly related to intention to attend. Conclusions: The multi-criteria decision analysis revealed the attributes of the screening techniques that are most important so as to increase intention to participate in a screening program. Even though the respondents may recognize the high importance of diagnostic effectiveness in the long term, their short-term decision to attend the screening tests may be less driven by this consideration. Our analysis suggests that inconvenience, safety, and frequency of the test are the strongest technique-related determinants of the respondents' intention to participate in colorectal screening programs. © 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
引用
收藏
页码:499 / 507
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] Ferlay J., Parkin D.M., Steliarova-Foucher E., Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008, Eur J Cancer, 46, 4, pp. 765-781, (2010)
  • [2] Visser O., Van Leeuwen F.E., Stage-specific survival of epithelial cancers in North-Holland/Flevoland, the Netherlands, Eur J Cancer, 41, 15, pp. 2321-2330, (2005)
  • [3] Lansdorp-Vogelaar I., Knudsen A.B., Brenner H., Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening - An overview, Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol, 24, 4, pp. 439-449, (2010)
  • [4] Dolan J.G., Patient priorities in colorectal cancer screening decisions, Health Expect, 8, 4, pp. 334-344, (2005)
  • [5] Marshall D.A., Johnson F.R., Philips K.A., Et al., Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey, Value Health, 10, 5, pp. 415-430, (2007)
  • [6] Gupta S., Will test-specific adherence predict the best colorectal cancer screening strategy?, Ann Intern Med, 150, 5, (2009)
  • [7] Ling B.S., Moskowitz M.A., Wachs D., Et al., Attitudes toward colorectal cancer screening tests, J Gen Intern Med, 16, 12, pp. 822-830, (2001)
  • [8] Katsumura Y., Yasunaga H., Imamura T., Et al., Relationship between risk information on total colonoscopy and patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening options: Analysis using the analytic hierarchy process, BMC Health Serv Res, 8, (2008)
  • [9] Imaeda A., Bender D., Fraenkel L., What is most important to patients when deciding about colorectal screening?, J Gen Intern Med, 25, 7, pp. 688-693, (2010)
  • [10] Hobbs B., Meier P., Multicriteria methods for resource planning: An experimental comparison, IEEE T Power Syst, 9, pp. 1811-1817, (1994)