Psychosocial consequences of invitation to colorectal cancer screening: a matched cohort study

• Published in: Journal of epidemiology and community health (1979) Vol. 75; no. 9; pp. 867 - 873
• Main Authors: Malmqvist, Jessica, Siersma, Volkert, Hestbech, Mie Sara, Nicolaisdóttir, Dagný Rós, Bang, Christine Winther, Brodersen, John
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BMJ Publishing Group LTD 01.09.2021; BMJ Publishing Group
• Subjects: Cancer; Cancer screening; Cohort analysis; Colorectal cancer; Colorectal carcinoma; Longitudinal studies; Mammography; Medical screening; Original Research; Perception; Questionnaires; Response rates; Denmark; medical screening; cancer; psychological stress; public health; longitudinal studies
• ISSN: 0143-005X; 1470-2738
• DOI: 10.1136/jech-2019-213360

BackgroundPsychosocial consequences of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can arise anywhere in the screening cascade. Previous studies have investigated the consequences of participating in CRC screening; however, we have not identified any studies investigating the psychosocial consequences of receiving the invitation. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate psychosocial consequences of invitation to CRC screening.MethodsThe study was a longitudinal study performed in Region Zealand, Denmark. Participants included in this study were a random sample of 1000 CRC screening invitees and 1000 control persons, not invited to screening, matched in a 1:1 design on sex, age and municipality. We assessed psychosocial consequences before and after invitation in both study groups concurrently. The primary outcomes were psychosocial consequences measured with the condition-specific questionnaire Consequences of Screening in ColoRectal Cancer.ResultsPreinvitation response rates were 575 (57.5%) and 610 (61.0%) for the invitation group and control group, respectively. Postinvitation response rates were 442 (44.2%) for the invitation group and 561 (56.1%) for the control group.No differences in mean change in scale score were seen except for the scale ‘Change in body perception’. The invitation group had a 0.39 lower change (99% CI (−0.78 to −0.004), p=0.009) in mean score than the control group in the direction of a less negative body perception after invitation.ConclusionsThis study did not identify an association between invitation to CRC screening and negative psychosocial consequences.