Colorectal Cancer and Screening Preferences.

¶ … colorectal cancer and screening preferences. It explores the article and discusses its information, validity, and ease of understanding by a laymen reader. There was one source used to complete this paper.

This article was written to address screening issues when it comes to the incidence of colorectal cancer. It outlined the fact that colon cancer is the leading cause of cancer related death in America.

It goes on to discuss the various screening methods that are currently used. It includes the names of the methods and states that resistance to the screening processes to choose from is causing people not to be screened, thereby giving up the chance for early diagnosis and treatment.

A study was conducted about screening methods for the disease and the results were discussed in the article.

Of the 193 patients who responded, 55% preferred sigmoidoscopy and FOBT, 29% chose colonoscopy, and 16% wanted no screening. Those with knowledge of someone with colon cancer or colon polyps reported a significantly higher preference for screening than those without such knowledge (Raina, 2004). Catholics were most likely to prefer no screening compared with non-Catholics. Ex-smokers (compared with all others) were more likely to want screening. Catholics were least likely to want colonoscopy. Patients with previous experience of colorectal screening preferred future screening. Those preferring no screening were significantly younger than those who expressed a preference for screening (Raina, 2004)."

This article is important because it raises awareness about the reluctance of people to be screened for one of the most curable cancers there are if it is caught in the early stages.

People do not get screened because the methods are unpleasant. This article is aimed at raising awareness about the importance of screening and to alert the medical profession of the vast numbers who would prefer not to be tested, thereby providing strength for an argument in favor of inventing less intrusive screening methods.

The study was conducted using patients waiting in outpatient settings. They were given a packet that outlined the various methods of screening and asked the patients to choose which method they would prefer. It also asked questions about whether they would prefer screening or no screening or different screening. It had a section for demographic information as well for the purpose of analysis.

Currently, the overall number of patients screened is low. (15,16,18) With emphasis on shared decision-making and the new reimbursement approval by Medicare, colonoscopy is more likely to be offered as a screening procedure to average-risk patients. We expected that more patients would opt for colonoscopy as the more complete and less frequent examination. The response rate to our questionnaires was 64%, which is comparable to other studies. (22,23) Most of our patients who had not been screened in the past preferred sigmoidoscopy (Raina, 2004)."

In my opinion this was an excellent paper for several reasons. The first reason it was good was the need. It is known that people avoid screening for colon cancer and that hesitance causes many deaths each year. This article puts numbers to the problem so that readers will understand how significant the reluctance to screen has become.