Barriers and facilitators to colorectal cancer diagnosis in New Zealand: a qualitative study
Blackmore et al. BMC Family Practice
(2020) 21:206
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01276-w
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Barriers and facilitators to colorectal cancer
diagnosis in New Zealand: a qualitative
study
Tania Blackmore1* , Kimberley Norman1, Jacquie Kidd2, Shemana Cassim1, Lynne Chepulis1, Rawiri Keenan1,
Melissa Firth1, Christopher Jackson3, Tim Stokes4, David Weller5, Jon Emery6 and Ross Lawrenson1
Abstract
Background: New Zealand (NZ) has high rates of colorectal cancer but low rates of early diagnosis. Due to a lack
of understanding of the pre-diagnostic experience from the patient’s perspective, it is necessary to investigate
potential patient and health system factors that contribute to longer diagnostic intervals. Previous qualitative
studies have discussed delays using The Model of Pathways to Treatment, but this has not been explored in the NZ
context. This study aimed to understand the patient experience and perception of their general practitioner (GP)
through the diagnostic process in the Waikato region of NZ. In particular, we sought to investigate potential
barriers and facilitators that contribute to longer diagnostic intervals.
Methods: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee.
Twenty-eight participants, diagnosed with colorectal cancer, were interviewed about their experience. Semi-structured
interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using The Model of Pathways to
Treatment framework (intervals: appraisal, help-seeking, diagnostic).
Results: Participant appraisal of symptoms was a barrier to prompt diagnosis, particularly if symptoms were normalised,
intermittent, or isolated in occurrence. Successful self-management techniques also resulted in delayed help-seeking.
However if symptoms worsened, disruption to work and daily routines were important facilitators to seeking a GP
consultation. Participants positively appraised GPs if they showed good technical competence and were proactive in
investigating symptoms. Negative GP appraisals were associated with a lack of physical examinations and misdiagnosis,
and left participants feeling dehumanised during the diagnostic process. However high levels of GP interpersonal
competence could override poor technical competence, resulting in an overall positive experience, even if the
cancer was diagnosed at an advanced stage. Māori participants often appraised symptoms inclusive of their
sociocultural environment and considered the impact of their symptoms in relation to family.
Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight the importance of tailored colorectal cancer symptom
communication in health campaigns, and indicate the significance of the interpersonal competence aspect of
GP-patient interactions. These findings suggest that interpersonal competence be overtly displayed in all GP
interactions to ensure a higher likelihood of a positive experience for the patient.
Keywords: Colorectal cancer, Delays, Patient-physician relationship
* Correspondence:
1
Medical Research Centre, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if
changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons
licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons
licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the
data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Blackmore et al. BMC Family Practice
(2020) 21:206
Background
New Zealand (NZ) has one of the highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world. CRC is NZs second
most common cause of cancer mortality with over 1200
deaths per annum from around 3000 registered cases
[1]. Māori, the indigenous population, are 30% less likely
to be diagnosed with CRC but their mortality rates are
only slightly lower than NZ European [2]. NZ has a low
rate of early stage CRC diagnosis by international standards [3]. Those diagnosed with early stage (I and II)
CRC have a better prognosis - at 90% 5-year survival
-than those diagnosed with late stage disease (III or IV),
at 14% 5-year survival [4]. However, the proportion of
Māori and Pacific peoples who have metastatic CRC at
diagnosis is much higher than for NZ European (Māori:
31.6%, Pacific: 34.9%, non-Māori/non-Pacific: 22.8%) [5].
These inequities have a considerable and disproportionate impact on poorer outcomes.
Aside from bowel screening, which began gradual regional implementation from 2017 but at the point of this
writing has not yet been fully implemented nationwide,
improving timely diagnosis is the most important step in
ensuring that CRC patients have a better chance at survival [6]. Previous research (the PIPER project) [5] has
extensively examined the management of CRC in NZ
post-diagnosis and highlighted the need for increased
understanding of patient and health system delays prior
to diagnosis. Indeed, a NZ Health and Disability Commissioner report (2004–2013) [7], has documented an
over-representation of CRC among cancers with longer
diagnostic intervals, with the longest times to diagnosis
occurring in primary care [7]. Contributing factors to
general practitioner (GP) related delay were a lack of
clinical examinations and the non-specific presentation
of CRC symptoms. Recent research with Māori communities has indicated continuity of care with a trusted GP
is needed for general practice to engage better with
Māori patients [8].
International studies have indicated that patient, physician and health system delays are key factors associated
with late stage diagnosis of CRC. A qualitative study of
20 men in Australia, for example, found delays were associated with patient misinterpretation of symptoms, a
failure to attribute symptoms to cancer, and subsequent
delays in consulting a health care professional [9]. Other
studies have also linked longer diagnostic intervals to
CRC symptoms, which are commonly associated with
more benign conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome or haemorrhoids, patient-GP communication
about symptoms, public and GP awareness of CRC, and
hospital system d (...truncated)