Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Modified Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Almaty, Kazakhstan

Raushan Zholmurzayeva, Dinara Ospanova, А.Т. ДЖУМАБЕКОВ, Yoshihiro Noso, N. A. Talkimbaeva, Akmaral Aytmanbetova, Neilya Ussebayeva, Tagabay Zhorayev, Ildar Ravisovich Fakhradiyev

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 2023

Полный текст Открытый доступ: Gold Метаданные (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.31557/apjcp.2023.24.10.3605
Достоверность данных 85 высокая
Как считается эта оценка

Складывается из проверяемых признаков самой записи: есть ли у статьи DOI, сколько независимых источников подтвердили её данные, заполнены ли обязательные поля и насколько свежо последнее подтверждение. Снижают оценку расхождения между источниками и отсутствие идентификатора. Значение от 80 означает, что запись опубликована без дополнительной проверки; от 60 до 79 — что она опубликована с пониженной достоверностью и ручная проверка желательна. Запись, выверенную редактором вручную, пересчёт не опускает ниже 90. Это оценка наших данных о статье, а не оценка самой статьи.

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, incorporating culturally tailored strategies to increase screening uptake and compliance, in Almaty, Kazakhstan. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Almaty between 2019-2022, involving 5370 participants aged 50-70 from diverse settings. Participants were assigned to the main (modified method) and comparison (standard method) groups based on the parity of their ID number digits. Variables of interest included demographics, somatic comorbidities, disability degree, and CRC screening results. The modified screening emphasized healthcare prioritization, optimized nursing resources, enhanced accessibility, and preparedness for the second screening stage. RESULTS: In the study 2702 patients in the main group (modified method), and 2668 patients in the comparison group (standard method). Comorbidity data showed that the majority of participants in both groups had between 1-10 comorbidities, with an average of 8.2 in the main group and 8.1 in the comparison group. Screening response rates at stage I were higher in the main group, with 82.6% of subjects undergoing screening, compared to 78.9% in the comparison group (χ2=12.12, p=0.001). The response rates were higher among females in both groups, and no significant differences were found across age groups. At stage II, the response rate was again higher in the main group (56.2%) than in the comparison group (47.2%) (χ2=4.217, p=0.040), with no significant differences noted in relation to sex or age. However, the main group showed a higher response rate at stage I among respondents with 6-10 comorbidities (87.1% vs 82.5%, χ2 =7.820, p=0.009). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that the modified program significantly outperformed the traditional one, achieving higher response rates at both the initial and subsequent stages of screening. These findings emphasize the value of revisiting and refining current CRC screening methods to maximize early detection rates.