Can colorectal cancer mass-screening organization be evidence-based? Lessons from failures: The experimental and pilot phases of the Lazio program

Antonio Federici, Alessandra Barca, Diego Baiocchi, Francesco Quadrino, Sabrina Valle, Piero Borgia, Gabriella Guasticchi, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, M. Anti, V. Casale, M. Di Cicco, V. Stigliano, L. Tammaro, A. Chiriatti, F. Barberani, E. Di Giulio, A. Gabbrielli, I. Stroppa, [No Value] Morini, A. ScozzarroV. Pietropaolo, A. Grassi, G. Bazuro, F. Del Manso, U. Mancini, M. Crespi, P. Amodeo, G. Assorgi, M. Bagarani, L. Schiffino, P. Fracasso, M. L. Mangia, M. Ferrara, G. Pippa, A. Vella, P. Vernia, G. Costamagna, L. Petruzzielllo, G. Delle Fave, F. Pallone, L. Capurso

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background. Screening programmes should be organized to translate theoretical efficacy into effectiveness. An evidence-based organizational model of colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) should assure feasibility and high compliance. Methods. A multidisciplinary Working Group (WG), reviewed literature and guidelines to define evidence-based recommendations. The WG identified the need for further local studies: physicians' CRCS attitudes, the effect of test type and provider on compliance, and individual reasons for non-compliance. A survey of digestive endoscopy services was conducted. A feasibility study on a target population of 300.000 has begun. Results. Based on the results of population trials and on literature review the screening strategy adopted was Faecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) every two years for 50-74 year olds and, for positives, colonoscopy. The immunochemical test was chosen because it has 20% higher compliance than the Guaiac. GPs were chosen as the preferred provider also for higher compliance. Since we observed that distance is the major determinant of non-compliance, we choose GPs because they are the closest providers, both geographically and emotionally, to the public. The feasibility study showed several barriers: GP participation was low, there were administrative problems to involve GPs; opportunistic testing by the GPs; difficulties in access to Gastroenterology centres; difficulties in gathering colonoscopy results; little time given to screening activity by the gastroenterology centre. Conclusion. The feasibility study highlighted several limits of the model. Most of the barriers that emerged were consequences of organisational choices not supported by evidence. The principal limit was a lack of accountability by the participating centres.

Original languageEnglish
Article number318
JournalBMC Public Health
Publication statusPublished - 2008

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health


Dive into the research topics of 'Can colorectal cancer mass-screening organization be evidence-based? Lessons from failures: The experimental and pilot phases of the Lazio program'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this