Decision Support and the Effectiveness of Web-based Delivery and Information Tailoring for Bowel Cancer Screening: An Exploratory Study

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in males and the second in females throughout the developed world. Population screening using fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) facilitates early detection and greater chance of survival, but participation rates are low. We developed a Web-based decision tool to provide information tailored to an individual’s decision stage for CRC screening and attitude toward screening utilizing the Preventive Health Model (PHM) and Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) as theoretical frameworks for screening behavior. We describe the practical steps employed in the tool’s design and the subsequent conduct of an exploratory study. Objective To design a decision tool for CRC screening and conduct an exploratory study among average-risk men and women to (1) test the impact of message type (tailored vs non-tailored) and message delivery modality (Web-based vs paper-based) on attitudes toward screening and screening uptake, and (2) investigate the acceptability of the decision tool and relevance of materials. Methods Participants (n = 100), recruited from a population sample of men and women aged 50-76 residing in urban Adelaide, Australia, were randomly assigned to a control group or one of 4 interventions: (1) Web-based and tailored information, (2) paper-based and tailored information, (3) Web-based and non-tailored (generic) information, or (4) paper-based and non-tailored information. Participation was augmented by snowball recruitment (n = 19). Questionnaires based on PHM variables were administered pre- and post-intervention. Participants were given the opportunity to request an FOBT. Following the intervention, participants discussed the acceptability of the tool. Results Full data were available for 87.4% (104/119) of participants. Post-intervention, perceived susceptibility scores for individuals receiving tailored information increased from mean 10.6 (SD 2.1) to mean 11.8 (SD 2.2). Scores on self-efficacy increased in the tailored group from mean 11.7 (SD 2.0) to mean 12.6 (SD 1.8). There were significant time x modality x message effects for social influence and salience and coherence, reflecting an increase in these scores for tailored Web-based participants only; social influence scores increased from mean 11.7 (SD 2.6) to mean 14.9 (SD 2.3), and salience and coherence scores increased from mean 16.0 (SD 2.2) to mean 17.7 (SD 2.1). There was no greater influence of modality or message type on movement toward a decision to screen or screening uptake, indicating that neither tailored messages nor a Web modality had superior effect. Overall, participants regarded tailored messages positively, but thought that the Web tool lacked “media richness.” Conclusions This exploratory study confirms that tailoring on PHM predictors of CRC screening has the potential to positively address attitudes toward screening. However, tailoring on these variables did not result in significantly increased screening uptake. Future research should consider other possible psychosocial influences. Mode of delivery did not affect outcomes, but as a delivery medium, the Web has economic and logistical advantages over paper.

[1]  Carol H Pullen,et al.  Tailored Versus Standard Internet‐delivered Interventions to Promote Physical Activity in Older Women , 2005, Journal of geriatric physical therapy.

[2]  Rosemary Fox,et al.  Informed choice in screening programmes: do leaflets help? A critical literature review. , 2006, Journal of public health.

[3]  J. Prochaska,et al.  A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. , 2010, Preventive medicine.

[4]  P. Glasziou,et al.  Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, hemoccult. , 2000, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[5]  Sally W Vernon,et al.  Intention to be screened over time for colorectal cancer in male automotive workers. , 2003, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[6]  R. Ettarh Colorectal Cancer - From Prevention to Patient Care , 2012 .

[7]  J. Wardle,et al.  Understanding Intentions and Action in Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2008, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[8]  T. Ganiats,et al.  Improving Fecal Occult Blood Testing Compliance Using a Mailed Educational Reminder , 2009, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  The relationship between self‐reported health status and the increasing likelihood of South Australians seeking Internet health information , 2010, Australian and New Zealand journal of public health.

[10]  Jane McGillivray,et al.  Cross-Cultural Validation of the Preventive Health Model for Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Australian Study , 2010, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[11]  I. Mühlhauser,et al.  Effect of evidence based risk information on “informed choice” in colorectal cancer screening: randomised controlled trial , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  Glyn Elwyn,et al.  Supporting Informed Decision Making for Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Testing on the Web: An Online Randomized Controlled Trial , 2010, Journal of medical Internet research.

[13]  E. Akl,et al.  Framing of health information messages. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[14]  S. Michie,et al.  Informed choice: understanding knowledge in the context of screening uptake. , 2003, Patient education and counseling.

[15]  Stephen R Cole,et al.  Psychosocial Variables Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening in South Australia , 2011, International journal of behavioral medicine.

[16]  Jasmin A. Tiro,et al.  Factorial Validity and Invariance of a Survey Measuring Psychosocial Correlates of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Ontario, Canada—A Replication Study , 2008, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[17]  S R Cole,et al.  A Randomised Trial of the Impact of New Faecal Haemoglobin Test Technologies on Population Participation in Screening for Colorectal Cancer , 2003, Journal of medical screening.

[18]  R. Schwarzer,et al.  Self-efficacy and health behaviours. , 1996 .

[19]  Terry Hyslop,et al.  Factorial Validity and Invariance of a Survey Measuring Psychosocial Correlates of Colorectal Cancer Screening among African Americans and Caucasians , 2005, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[20]  William C. Mann,et al.  RHETORICAL STRUCTURE THEORY: A THEORY OF TEXT ORGANIZATION , 1987 .

[21]  G Rennert,et al.  Screening with faecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer: assessment of two methods that attempt to improve compliance , 2001, European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation.

[22]  Laura R. Olevitch,et al.  Tailoring Health Messages: Customizing Communication With Computer Technology , 1999 .

[23]  B. Tilley,et al.  Development and validation of an instrument to measure factors related to colorectal cancer screening adherence. , 1997, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[24]  S. Noar,et al.  Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. , 2007, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  Ingrid Flight,et al.  Internet access for delivery of health information to South Australians older than 50 , 2008, Australian and New Zealand journal of public health.

[26]  Isaac M. Lipkus,et al.  Effects of Communicating Social Comparison Information on Risk Perceptions for Colorectal Cancer , 2006, Journal of health communication.

[27]  Ingrid Flight,et al.  Turning Intention Into Behaviour: The Effect of Providing Cues to Action on Participation Rates for Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2012 .

[28]  Celette Sugg Skinner,et al.  How effective is tailored print communication? , 1999, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[29]  Alexander J. Rothman,et al.  Examining the Role of Perceived Susceptibility on Colorectal Cancer Screening Intention and Behavior , 2010, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[30]  D. Wantland,et al.  The Effectiveness of Web-Based vs. Non-Web-Based Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Change Outcomes , 2004, Journal of medical Internet research.

[31]  Pei-Chen Sun,et al.  The design of instructional multimedia in e-Learning: A Media Richness Theory-based approach , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[32]  Sandra van Dulmen,et al.  Tailored information about cancer risk and screening: a systematic review. , 2009, Patient education and counseling.

[33]  A. Tibell,et al.  From words to action – influence of two organ donation campaigns on knowledge and formal decision making , 2009, Clinical transplantation.

[34]  S. Prentice-Dunn,et al.  Effects of persuasive message order on coping with breast cancer information. , 2001, Health education research.

[35]  Joseph N. Cappella,et al.  Integrating Message Effects and Behavior Change Theories: Organizing Comments and Unanswered Questions , 2006 .

[36]  M. Fishbein,et al.  Understanding tailoring in communicating about health. , 2008, Health education research.

[37]  D Hüske-Kraus,et al.  Text Generation in Clinical Medicine – a Review , 2003, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[38]  Ralf Schwarzer,et al.  Translating intentions into nutrition behaviors via planning requires self-efficacy: evidence from Thailand and Germany. , 2010, International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie.

[39]  E. Heiby,et al.  Assessment of Determinants of Compliance to Twelve Health Behaviors: Psychometric Evaluation of the Health Behavior Schedule II , 2007, Psychological reports.

[40]  Carlene Wilson,et al.  Focus on health information technology, electronic health records and their financial impact: The impact of computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and perceived usability and acceptability on the efficacy of a decision support tool for colorectal cancer screening , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[41]  S. Sutton,et al.  Evaluation of an informed choice invitation for type 2 diabetes screening. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[42]  S. Noar,et al.  Reporting standards for studies of tailored interventions. , 2012, Health education research.

[43]  Stephen R. Cole,et al.  Protocol for population testing of an Internet-based Personalised Decision Support system for colorectal cancer screening , 2010, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[44]  Bernard Richards,et al.  The current and future role of the internet in patient education , 1998, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[45]  M. Conner,et al.  Predicting health behaviour : research and practice with social cognition models , 2005 .

[46]  P. Davidson,et al.  Bandura's exercise self-efficacy scale: validation in an Australian cardiac rehabilitation setting. , 2009, International Journal of Nursing Studies.

[47]  R. G. Crowder Principles of learning and memory , 1977 .

[48]  M. Kreuter,et al.  Community health promotion ideas that work : a field-book for practitioners , 1998 .

[49]  A. Sowden,et al.  Increasing informed uptake and non‐uptake of screening: evidence from a systematic review , 2001, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[50]  R. Daft,et al.  Information Richness. A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design , 1983 .

[51]  Ralf Schwarzer,et al.  Self-efficacy moderates the mediation of intentions into behavior via plans. , 2009, American journal of health behavior.

[52]  M. Fishbein,et al.  The Role of Theory in Developing Effective Health Communications , 2006 .

[53]  A Dijkstra,et al.  The development of computer-generated tailored interventions. , 1999, Patient education and counseling.

[54]  B. Rimer,et al.  Informed decision making: What is its role in cancer screening? , 2004, Cancer.

[55]  T. Hyslop,et al.  Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening decision stage. , 2010, Preventive medicine.

[56]  Suzanne M. Miller,et al.  Colorectal cancer knowledge is not associated with screening compliance or intention , 2009, Journal of Cancer Education.

[57]  M. Cooke,et al.  Researching the researchers: using a snowballing technique. , 2004, Nurse researcher.

[58]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global Cancer Statistics , 2011 .