Colorectal Carcinoma Screening in Lagos, Nigeria, Are We Doing it Right?

Charles A Onyekwere, Anthonia O Ogbera, Fatima B Abdulkareem, John Ashindoitiang


Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has proven effective in reducing disease mortality and is also cost effective. Recent reports indicate that colorectal cancer is not uncommon and presents with advanced disease in Nigeria. Thus this study was aimed at reviewing the practice of CRC screening among medical practitioners in Nigeria.

Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was utilized to obtain data for this study, which was distributed to over 500 practising doctors in Lagos, Nigeria from September to November 2007. The data obtained from the questionnaire include basic demographics, type of practice, duration in years of medical practice described as short (<=5 years), medium (5 to 10 years) or long (> 10 years), and knowledge regarding CRC, as well as CRC screening techniques and methodologies.

Results: There were 300 respondents with a mean age (SD) of 33 (7.8) years and an age range of 23 - 67 years. In terms of duration of medical practice, 190 (63%) were short, 43 (14%) medium and 67 (23%) long. Majority (65%) of the respondents were in teaching hospitals, 18.5% in private hospitals and 5.7% were in general (community) hospitals. The knowledge of the clinical features as well as the risk factors of CRC was fair in over 75% of the respondents. Most respondents, 265 (87.8%), agreed that CRC was worth screening for; 21 (5%) did not. In all, 246 (82%) gave reasons for their responses. However, just over half of the respondents employed one of the following: faecal occult blood test (FOBT), double contrast barium enema (DCBE), flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or a combination of any of the techniques for screening. Usage of CT colonography was low. Screening rates by respondents for other malignancies in this survey was higher than that of CRC (prostate 95%, breast 97%, cervix 99%), though the most commonly encountered malignancy was breast cancer. On the contrary, for surveillance purposes, barely half of the respondents used FOBT annually or colonoscopy every 10 years, while less than half employed DCBE, sigmoidoscopy and CT colonography.

Conclusions: Although awareness of CRC screening in this study is high, its performance is very low and highly variable in form in our region. There is a need to improve the practice of CRC screening through sensitising of medical practitioners to the need for screening, increase knowledge with regard to the relative merits of available methodologies for screening/surveillance of CRC and provide all necessary diagnostic resources and possible formulation of effective local guidelines.

Gastroenterol Res. 2009;2(1):38-42


Colorectal cancer, screening, Nigeria

Full Text: HTML PDF

Browse  Journals  


Journal of Clinical Medicine Research

Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism

Journal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics


World Journal of Oncology

Gastroenterology Research

Journal of Hematology


Journal of Medical Cases

Journal of Current Surgery

Clinical Infection and Immunity


Cardiology Research

World Journal of Nephrology and Urology

Cellular and Molecular Medicine Research


Journal of Neurology Research

International Journal of Clinical Pediatrics



Gastroenterology Research, bimonthly, ISSN 1918-2805 (print), 1918-2813 (online), published by Elmer Press Inc.                     
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.

This is an open-access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted
non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Creative Commons Attribution license (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International CC-BY-NC 4.0)

This journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals,
the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

website:   editorial contact:
Address: 9225 Leslie Street, Suite 201, Richmond Hill, Ontario, L4B 3H6, Canada

© Elmer Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in the published articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the editors and Elmer Press Inc. This website is provided for medical research and informational purposes only and does not constitute any medical advice or professional services. The information provided in this journal should not be used for diagnosis and treatment, those seeking medical advice should always consult with a licensed physician.