Paper  doi  abstract   bibtex   

@article{ McGregoretal:2015,
  author = {McGregor, L and Bonello, B and Kerrison, R and Nickerson, C and Baio, 
	G and Berkman, L and Rees, C and Atkin, W and Wardle, J and {von Wagner, C}},
  title = {{Uptake of Bowel Scope (Flexible Sigmoidoscopy) Screening in the English National 
	Programme: the first 14 months.}},
  journal = {Journal of Medical Screening},
  year = {2015},
  month = {Sep},
  abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To examine uptake in the first six pilot centres of the English Bowel 
      Scope Screening (BSS) programme, which began in early 2013 and invites adults
      aged 55 for a one off Flexible Sigmoidoscopy. METHODS: Between March 2013 and May
      2014 the six pilot centres sent 21,187 invitations. Using multivariate logistic
      regression analysis, we examined variation in uptake by gender, socioeconomic
      deprivation (using the Index of Multiple Deprivation), area-based ethnic
      diversity (proportion of non-white residents), screening centre, and appointment 
      time (routine: daytime vs out-of-hours: evening/weekend). RESULTS: Uptake was
      43.1%. Men were more likely to attend than women (45% vs 42%; OR 1.136, 95% CI
      1.076, 1.199, p < 0.001). Combining data across centres, there was a
      socioeconomic gradient in uptake, ranging from 33% in the most deprived to 53% in
      the least deprived quintile. Areas with the highest level of ethnic diversity
      also had lower uptake (39%) than other areas (41-47%) (all p < 0.02), but there
      was no gradient. Individuals offered a routine appointment were less likely to
      attend than those offered an out-of-hours appointment (42% vs. 44%; OR 0.931, 95%
      CI 0.882, 0.983, p = 0.01). Multivariate analyses confirmed independent effects
      of deprivation, gender, and centre, but not of ethnic diversity or appointment
      time. CONCLUSION: Early indications of uptake are encouraging. Future efforts
      should focus on increasing public awareness of the programme and reducing
      socioeconomic inequalities.},
  doi = {10.1177/0969141315604659},
  url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26387824}
}