Joseph A. Diaz

Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) disparities between non-Latino Whites and Latinos remain, and may have increased. The goal of this analysis was to examine the association between Latino race/ethnicity, gender, and English-proficiency and CRC screening. Analysis of the CDC’s BRFSS 2008 survey. We estimated crude and adjusted screening rates and odds ratios of respondents’ reported CRC test receipt stratified by self-reported Latino ethnicity, gender, and limited English proficiency (LEP) as determined by language of survey response (English vs Spanish). Of 99,883 respondents included in the study populations, LEP Latino men had the lowest adjusted screening rates (48.2 %) which were lower that all other Latinos subgroups including Latina women with LEP (56.2 %). Compared to non-Latino White men, LEP Latino men were 0.47 times as likely to report receiving CRC screening tests (AOR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.35–0.63). Disparities in CRC screening are most dramatic for LEP Latino men.

Although colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, the burden of this disease could be dramatically reduced by increased utilization of screening. Evidence-based recommendations and guidelines from national societies recommend screening all average risk adults starting at age 50 years. However, the myriad screening options and slight differences in screening recommendations between guidelines may lead to confusion among patients and their primary care providers. In addition, varied colorectal cancer incidence and screening rates among different racial/ethnic groups, inconsistent screening recommendations based on family history and/or age, and increasing awareness of the role of nonadenomatous and nonpolypoid lesions also pose potential challenges to primary care providers when counseling patients. The goal of this review, therefore, is to briefly summarize the colorectal cancer screening guidelines issued by 3 major organizations, compare their recommendations, and address emerging issues in colorectal cancer screening.

Despite generally lower socioeconomic status and worse access to healthcare, Latinos have better overall health outcomes and longer life expectancy than non-Latino Whites. This “Latino Health Paradox” has been partially attributed to healthier cardiovascular (CV) behaviors among Latinos. However, as Latinos become more acculturated, differences in some CV behaviors disappear. This study aimed to explore how associations between acculturation and CV behaviors among Latinos vary by country of origin. Combined weighted data from the 2005 and 2007 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) were used to investigate associations between acculturation level and CV behaviors among Latinos by country of origin. Among all Latinos, increased acculturation was associated with more smoking, increased leisure-time physical activity, and greater consumption of fast foods, but no change in fruit/vegetable and less soda intake. These trends varied, however, by Latino sub-groups from different countries of origin. Country of origin appears to impact associations between acculturation and CV behaviors among Latinos in complex ways.

To explore colorectal cancer risk perceptions among Latinos. Focus groups discussions among Spanish-speaking Latinos conducted between February and July 2007 with 37 men and women who were age-eligible for colorectal cancer screening. Predominant themes of perceived colorectal cancer risk included: general cancer risks, risks related to nutrition and the digestive tract, and risks related to sexual practices. Participants frequently referred to the role of diet in keeping the colon “clean,” suggesting that retained feces increase colorectal cancer risk. Among both men and women, rectal sex was commonly associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. Some Latinos may hold misperceptions about colorectal cancer risks, including an association between rectal sex and colon cancer, that may impact their screening behaviors. Clinicians and public health officials should consider these potential risk misperceptions and explore for other risk misperceptions when counseling and educating patients about colorectal cancer screening.

Background: Language barriers among some Latinos may contribute to the lower rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening between Latinos and non-Latino Whites. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between language and receipt of CRC screening tests among Latinos and non-Latinos using a geographically diverse, population-based sample of adults. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey. Analysis included adults age 50 years and older, who completed the 2006 BRFSS in a state that recorded data from English- and Spanish-speaking participants. Results: The primary outcome measure was receipt of colorectal screening tests (fecal occult blood testing within prior 12 months and/or lower endoscopy within 10 years). Of the 99,895 respondents included in the study populations, 33% of Latinos responding-in-Spanish reported having had CRC testing, whereas 51% of Latinos responding-in-English and 62% of English-speaking non-Latinos reported test receipt. In multivariable analysis, compared with non-Latinos, Latinos responding-in-English were 16% less likely to have received CRC testing [odds ratio (OR), 0.84; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.73-0.98], and Latinos responding-in-Spanish were 43% less likely to have received CRC testing (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.74). Additionally, compared with Latinos responding-in-English, Latinos responding-in-Spanish were 36% less likely to have received CRC testing (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.84). Conclusion: Latinos responding to the 2006 BRFSS survey in Spanish had a significantly lower likelihood of receiving CRC screening tests compared with non-Latinos and to Latinos responding-in-English. Based on this analysis, Spanish language use is negatively associated with CRC screening and may contribute to disparities in CRC screening. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17(8):2169–73)

OBJECTIVES: To understand what patients expect from physicians regarding information seeking on the Internet. DESIGN: Self-administered survey. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Waiting rooms of 4 community-based primary care offices. MEASUREMENTS/MAIN RESULTS: Of 494 patients invited to participate, 330 completed the survey for a response rate of 67%. Of 177 respondents who used the Internet for health information, only 15% agreed that physicians should ask them about their Internet searches. Most (62%) agreed that physicians should recommend specific web sites where patients can learn more about their health care. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians should recognize that many patients would like guidance as they turn to the Internet for medical information. Physicians can utilize quality assessment tools and existing resources that facilitate referring patients to authoritative, commercial-free, patient-oriented medical information on the Internet.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the percentage of patients enrolled in a primary care practice who use the Internet for health information, to describe the types of information sought, to evaluate patients’ perceptions of the quality of this information, and to determine if patients who use the Internet for health information discuss this with their doctors. DESIGN: Self-administered mailed survey. SETTING: Patients from a primary care internal medicine private practice. PARTICIPANTS: Randomly selected patients (N=1,000) were mailed a confidential survey between December 1999 and March 2000. The response rate was 56.2%. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 512 patients who returned the survey, 53.5% (274) stated that they used the Internet for medical information. Those using the Internet for medical information were more educated (P<.001) and had higher incomes (P<.001). Respondents used the Internet for information on a broad range of medical topics. Sixty percent felt that the information on the Internet was the “same as” or “better than” information from their doctors. Of those using the Internet for health information, 59% did not discuss this information with their doctor. Neither gender, education level, nor age less than 60 years was associated with patients sharing their Web searches with their physicians. However, patients who discussed this information with their doctors rated the quality of information higher than those who did not share this information with their providers. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care providers should recognize that patients are using the World Wide Web as a source of medical and health information and should be prepared to offer suggestions for Web-based health resources and to assist patients in evaluating the quality of medical information available on the Internet.