Colorectal cancer patients can be advocates for colorectal cancer screening for their siblings: A study on siblings' perspectives. Issue 12 (14th August 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tan, Ker‐Kan; Lim, Tian‐Zhi; Chew, Emily; Chow, Wen‐Min; Koh, Gerald Choon‐Huat
• Other Names: Irwin Kelly E. guestEditor.; Loscalzo Matthew L. guestEditor.
• Is Part Of: Psycho-oncology. Volume 29:Issue 12(2020)
• Page Start: 2028
• Page End: 2032
• Publication Date: 2020-08-14
• Subjects: barriers -- cancer -- colorectal cancer -- facilitators -- oncology -- psycho‐oncology -- qualitative interviews -- screening -- siblings; Cancer -- Psychological aspects -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Social aspects -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- psychology -- Periodicals; 616.9940019
• DOI: 10.1002/pon.5496
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1057-9249

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: This study was performed to explore in‐depth, the issues and barriers pertaining to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening amongst the siblings of CRC patients in view of their higher risk of developing CRC. Methods: A qualitative study of siblings of CRC patients was performed from August 2017 to October 2018. Semi‐structured interviewed were performed until data saturation was achieved. The data was then thematically analysed. Results: A total of 36 siblings of CRC patients, with a median age of 59 (range 39‐78) years old completed the interviews. All the interviews were conducted alone with the participants. Each interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. None of the participants has undergone screening colonoscopy prior to the interviews. After thematic analysis, five themes were identified. These include: (i) Misunderstanding their own risk of developing colorectal cancer; (ii) Misperceptions of the role of "screening" for colorectal cancer.; (iii) Misconception of the CRC screening modality for FDRs; (iv) Barriers and facilitators of undergoing screening; (v) Misperceptions of national healthcare policies. Conclusions: Identifying and addressing the identified barriers for these siblings to undergo screening colonoscopy is easily attainable. A multi‐pronged approach should also be adopted to address the various concerns so as to reduce the incidence of CRC amongst these higher risk individuals.