Data from organized programs around the world show lower participation in lower socioeconomic strata.
Programmatic, or organized, cancer screening refers to a systematic screening effort that is typically organized at a national level, or, as in the U.S., by a large healthcare system (e.g., Kaiser Permanente). These programs are typically based on fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). Most screening in the U.S. is opportunistic, meaning that it results from a physician–patient interaction. Although the U.S. has the world's highest screening participation rates, organized screening is generally considered a superior approach to opportunistic screening.
In this study, researchers assessed socioeconomic disparities in participation in organized colorectal screening programs. They surveyed 24 organized, FOBT-based screening programs worldwide and reviewed relevant publications. Eleven programs collected data on participation by socioeconomic status (SES), analyses of which were available in 23 publications. Lower SES was associated with lower participation in 28 of 31 unique findings published, which included SES measures of income level, economic burden of testing, quality of medical insurance, and education level. Differences in screening rates were as high as 26% between groups in the highest and lowest SES categories.
Reviewing Author
DisclosuresConsultant/Advisory BoardOlympus Corporation America; Boston Scientific
Speaker’s BureauOlympus
Grant/Research SupportMedtronic; Boston Scientific; Colonary Solutions; Paion Medical; Medivators; Braintree Laboratories
Editorial BoardsWorld Journal of Gastroenterology; The Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology; Techniques in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Medscape Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics; Annals of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research; Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology; Gastroenterology Research and Practice; GI & Hepatology News; Gastroenterology Report; Clinical Epidemiology Reviews; JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology; GI Journal Watch; Austin Journal of Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Treasurer); US Multi-Society Task Force (AGA, ACG, ASGE) (Chair)
DisclosuresConsultant/Advisory BoardOlympus Corporation America; Boston Scientific
Speaker’s BureauOlympus
Grant/Research SupportMedtronic; Boston Scientific; Colonary Solutions; Paion Medical; Medivators; Braintree Laboratories
Editorial BoardsWorld Journal of Gastroenterology; The Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology; Techniques in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Medscape Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics; Annals of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research; Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology; Gastroenterology Research and Practice; GI & Hepatology News; Gastroenterology Report; Clinical Epidemiology Reviews; JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology; GI Journal Watch; Austin Journal of Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Treasurer); US Multi-Society Task Force (AGA, ACG, ASGE) (Chair)
Comment
These results suggest that disparities in screening participation occur in organized as well as opportunistic screening. In the U.S., lower participation is associated with lower socioeconomic status and African-American race. Constant vigilance is needed to try to optimize screening rates in these groups.