Author ORCID Identifier
Dinkel - https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0262-4429
Ratnapradipa - https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0265-2400
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
4-18-2022
Abstract
Compared to urban residents, rural populations are less likely to engage in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. As part of a statewide cancer needs assessment, we aimed to elicit rural perspectives about CRC screening and resources. We conducted three focus groups with rural Nebraska cancer survivors and caregivers (N = 20) in Spring 2021 using a collective case study design. Participant awareness of and knowledge about CRC screening methods varied across focus groups; overall, 95% of participants had heard of colonoscopy. Participants were less familiar with fecal tests and had confusion about them. Colonoscopy was associated with negative perceptions regarding the time, cost, and discomfort of the preparation and procedure, but some providers did not discuss alternative methods unless the patient resisted colonoscopy. Healthcare providers played a key role educating rural communities about CRC screening recommendations (age, risk) and testing options and being persistent in those recommendations. CRC awareness campaigns should include a variety of communication channels (TV, radio, billboards, health fairs, churches, healthcare settings). Promotion of CRC screening should include education about screening age guidelines, alternative test types, and informed decision-making between provider and patient regarding preferred screening methods based on the pros and cons of each test type. Individuals with a family history of colon issues (Crohn’s disease, CRC) are considered high risk and need to be aware that screening should be discussed at earlier ages.
Journal Title
Journal of Cancer Education
Recommended Citation
Ratnapradipa, K.L., Napit, K., Ranta, J., Luma, L.B., Dinkel, D., Robinson, T., Schabloske, L., & Watanabe-Galloway, S. (2022). Qualitative analysis of colorectal cancer screening in rural Nebraska. Journal of Cancer Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-022-02170-y
Comments
This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use, but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-022-02170-y
Publisher holds a Bespoken License