BUCCS 2 (version 1)
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Barriers to the uptake of colorectal cancer screening (BUCCS 2): a qualitative study to understand non-participation in Bowelscope flexible sigmoidoscopy screening (National pilot sites)
IRAS ID
140134
Contact name
G P Rubin
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Durham University
Research summary
It is important to understand the reasons people do not take part in cancer screening as this may help to inform the development of interventions to improve uptake. This study will investigate the reasons for non-participation in the pilot stages of the NHS Bowel scope flexible sigmoidoscopy colorectal cancer screening programme. This is a new screening option for colorectal cancer in the UK that is currently being offered to people aged 55 years across 6 pilot sites in England, before being rolled out nationally. A large UK based trial has shown this type of screening could have substantial long-term benefits and reduce the number of colorectal cancer associated deaths. A one off invitation for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening will be offered in addition to the existing biennial Faecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) screening currently available for people aged 60-75 years. Although there are established generic aspects to non-participation in cancer screening, we anticipate a range of factors specifically associated with the screening test itself as well as the implementation of the Bowel scope screening programme. Qualitative in-depth face to face interviews will be undertaken with people who have not responded to their invitation to take part in FSCCS in order to gain a thorough understanding of their beliefs, attitudes and the circumstances surrounding their non-participation. Potential interviewees will be identified and recruited with the help of two of the pilot screening centres (South of Tyne and Norwich) as well as local GP practices within these areas. Comparison of accounts from people located in different geographic locations will allow us to explore potential socio-economic influences in more depth. It is anticipated that we will require around 20-30 interviews from each geographical site in order to ensure that we have fully explored all the themes within the data.
REC name
London - Bromley Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/LO/0207
Date of REC Opinion
23 Jan 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion