Examining the role of perceived susceptibility on colorectal cancer screening intention and behavior

Amy McQueen, Sally W Vernon, Alexander J Rothman, Gregory J Norman, Ronald E Myers, Barbara C Tilley, Amy McQueen, Sally W Vernon, Alexander J Rothman, Gregory J Norman, Ronald E Myers, Barbara C Tilley

Abstract

Although support exists for multiple psychosocial predictors of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, little is known about the relationships among these variables. Understanding the associations between such predictors could refine health behavior theories and inform the design of interventions. In addition to direct effects, we examined whether baseline perceived susceptibility was a moderator of, or was mediated by, changes in other psychosocial determinants of CRC screening intention and behavior. Longitudinal path models were tested using data from 1,001 white male automotive workers who participated in The Next Step Trial. Our sample included workers with no history of CRC who were due for CRC screening but did not complete CRC screening prior to the assessment of hypothesized mediators at year 1 follow-up. Perceived susceptibility interacted differently with four psychosocial constructs in models predicting CRC screening intention or behavior. Perceived susceptibility was independent of perceived benefits, moderated the change in perceived barriers and self-efficacy, and was mediated by the change in family influence. The role of perceived susceptibility was not limited to direct effects but involved mediating and moderating pathways of influence.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Models illustrating perceived susceptibility as an indirect effect of the change in a psychosocial variable on colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) intention or behavior (path 1* path 2) and as a moderator of change in a psychosocial variable (path 3) while accounting for the direct effect (path 4) and potential covariates. Models were repeated for each psychosocial (perceived benefits, barriers, self-efficacy, and family influence) and outcome variable. Legend: BL = baseline, Y1 = Year 1, Y2 = Year 2, CRC = colorectal cancer, CRCS = CRC screening

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2009. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2009.
    1. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–1981.
    1. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: A joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:130–160.
    1. U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–637.
    1. Meissner HI, Breen NL, Klabunde CN, Vernon SW. Patterns of colorectal cancer screening uptake among men and women in the US. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:389–394.
    1. Swan J, Breen NL, Coates RJ, Rimer BK, Lee NC. Progress in cancer screening practices in the United States: Results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer. 2003;97:1528–1540.
    1. Cokkinides VE, Chao A, Smith RA, Vernon SW, Thun MJ. Correlates of underutilization of colorectal cancer screening among U.S. adults, age 50 years and older. Prev Med. 2003;36:85–91.
    1. Seeff LC, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, et al. Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult US population: results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer. 2004;100:2093–2103.
    1. Subramanian S, Klosterman M, Amonkar MM, Hunt TL. Adherence with colorectal cancer screening guidelines: A review. Prev Med. 2004;38:536–550.
    1. Vernon SW, McQueen A. Colorectal cancer screening. In: Holland JC, Breitbart WS, Jacobson PB, et al., editors. Psychooncology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2010. pp. 71–83.
    1. McQueen A, Vernon SW, Myers RE, Watts BG, Lee ES, Tilley BC. Correlates and predictors of colorectal cancer screening among male automotive workers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:500–509.
    1. Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: A decade later. Health Educ Q. 1984;11:1–47.
    1. Weinstein ND, Sandman PM. The precaution adoption process model. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, editors. Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2002. pp. 121–143.
    1. Witte K. Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel processing model. Communication Monographs. 1992;59:330–349.
    1. Aiken LS, West SG, Woodward CK, Reno RR, Reynolds KD. Increasing screening mammography in asymptomatic women: Evaluation of a second-generation, theory-based program. Health Psychol. 1994;13:526–538.
    1. Ronis DL. Conditional health threats: Health beliefs, decisions, and behaviors among adults. Health Psychol. 1992;11:127–134.
    1. Fishbein M. The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care. 2000;12:273–278.
    1. Ronis DL, Kaiser MK. Correlates of breast self-examination in a sample of college women: Analyses of linear structural relations. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1989;19:1068–1084.
    1. Weinstein ND. The precaution adoption process. Health Psychol. 1988;7:355–386.
    1. Weinstein ND, Lyon JE, Sandman PM, Cuite CL. Experimental evidence for stages of health behavior change: The precaution adoption process model applied to home radon testing. Health Psychol. 1998;17:445–453.
    1. Polacsek M, Celentano DD, O'Campo P, Santelli J. Correlates of condom use stage of change: Implications for intervention. AIDS Educ Prev. 1999;11:38–52.
    1. Schnoll RA, Rothman RL, Newman H, et al. Characteristics of cancer patients entering a smoking cessation program and correlates of quit motivation: Implications for the development of tobacco control programs for cancer patients. Psychooncology. 2004;13:346–358.
    1. Rothman AJ. "Is there nothing more practical than a good theory?": Why innovations and advances in health behavior change will arise if interventions are used to test and refine theory. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004;1:1–7.
    1. Tilley BC, Vernon SW, Glanz K, et al. Worksite cancer screening and nutrition intervention for high-risk auto workers: Design and baseline findings of the Next Step Trial. Prev Med. 1997;26:227–235.
    1. Tilley BC, Vernon SW, Myers R, et al. The Next Step Trial: Impact of a worksite colorectal cancer screening promotion program. Prev Med. 1999;28:276–283.
    1. Robinson CR, Waxweiler RJ, McCammon CS. Pattern and model makers, proportional mortality 1972–1978. Am J Ind Med. 1980;1:159–165.
    1. Swanson GM, Belle SH, Burrows RW. Colon cancer incidence among modelmakers and patternmakers in the automobile manufacturing industry: A continuing dilemma. J Occup Med. 1985;27:567–569.
    1. Tilley BC, Glanz K, Kristal AR, et al. Nutrition intervention for high-risk auto workers: Results of the Next Step Trial. Prev Med. 1999;28:284–292.
    1. Myers RE, Vernon SW, Tilley BC, Lu M, Watts BG. Intention to screen for colorectal cancer among white male employees. Prev Med. 1998;27:279–287.
    1. Eddy D. ACS report on the cancer-related health checkup. CA Cancer J Clin. 1980;30:194–240.
    1. Levin B, Murphy GP. Revision in American Cancer Society recommendations for the early detection of colorectal cancer. CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 1992;42:296–299.
    1. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. NJ: Prentice Hall; 1986.
    1. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
    1. Antonovsky A. Health Stress and Coping. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1979.
    1. Myers RE, Ross E, Jepson C, et al. Modeling adherence to colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med. 1994;23:142–151.
    1. Myers RE, Chodak GW, Wolf TA, et al. Adherence by African American men to prostate cancer education and early detection. Cancer. 1999;86:88–104.
    1. Myers RE, Wolf TA, McKee L, et al. Factors associated with intention to undergo annual prostate cancer screening among African American men in Philadelphia. Cancer. 1996;78:471–479.
    1. Vernon SW, Myers RE, Tilley BC. Development and validation of an instrument to measure factors related to colorectal cancer screening adherence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1997;6:825–832.
    1. Ajzen I, Fishbein F. Scaling and testing multiplicative combinations in the expectancy-value model of attitudes. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2008;38:2222–2247.
    1. Sobel ME, Leinhardt S. Sociological methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models; pp. 290–312.
    1. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6:1–55.
    1. Hu L, Bentler PM. Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural Equation Modeling. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications; 1995. pp. 76–99.
    1. Jackson KM, Aiken LS. A psychosocial model of sun protection and sunbathing in young women: The impact of health beliefs, attitudes, norms, and self-efficacy for sun protection. Health Psychol. 2000;19:469–578.
    1. Vernon SW. Risk perception and risk communication for cancer screening behaviors: A review. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999:101–119.
    1. Gerend MA, Aiken LS, West SG, Erchull MJ. Beyond medical risk: Investigating the psychological factors underlying women's perceptions of susceptibility to breast cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis. Health Psychol. 2004;23:247–258.
    1. Blalock SJ, DeVellis BM, Afifi RA, Sandler RS. Risk perceptions and participation in colorectal cancer screening. Health Psychol. 1990;9:792–806.
    1. Lipkus IM, Klein WMP. Effects of communicating social comparison information on risk perceptions for colorectal cancer. J Health Commun. 2006;11:391–407.
    1. Lipkus IM, Klein WMP, Skinner CS, Rimer BK. Breast cancer risk perceptions and breast cancer worry: What predicts what? J Risk Res. 2005;8:439–452.
    1. Hay JL, Ford JS, Klein D, et al. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening in mammography-adherent older women. J Behav Med. 2003;26:553–576.
    1. Manne S, Markowitz A, Winawer SJ, et al. Understanding intention to undergo colonoscopy among intermediate risk siblings of colorectal cancer patients: a test of a mediational model. Prev Med. 2003;36:71–84.
    1. Norman GJ. Answering the "What works?" question in health behavior change. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34:449–450.
    1. Lipkus IM, Skinner CS, Dement J, et al. Increasing colorectal cancer screening among individuals in the carpentry trade: Test of risk communication interventions. Prev Med. 2005;40:489–501.
    1. Keller PA. Converting the unconverted: The effect of inclination and opportunity to discount health-related fear appeals. J Appl Psychol. 1999;84:403–415.
    1. McQueen A, Tiro JA, Vernon SW. Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:2231–2237.
    1. Rawl SR, Champion VL, Menon U, Loehrer PJ, Vance GH, Skinner CS. Validation of scales to measure benefits and barriers to colorectal cancer screening. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2001;19:47–63.
    1. Tiro JA, Vernon SW, Hyslop T, Myers RE. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening among African Americans and Caucasians. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:2855–2861.
    1. Ritvo P, Myers R, Del Giudice ML, et al. Factorial validity and invariance of a survey measuring psychosocial correlates of colorectal cancer screening in Ontario, Canada--a replication study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:3279–3283.
    1. Cram P, Fendrick AM, Inadomi JM, Cowen ME, Carpenter D, Vijan S. The impact of a celebrity promotional campaign on the use of colon cancer screening. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1601–1605.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren