首页> 外文期刊>Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory >A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes
【24h】

A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes

机译:比较用于邀请粪便潜血试验阳性的受试者进行结肠镜检查评估的不同策略。基于人群的筛查计划中的随机对照试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objective. The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT + ) for a total colonoscopy (TC).Method. FIT+ patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant).Results. In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk - RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97-1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01-1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14-1.87).Conclusion. Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective.
机译:目的。这项平行随机对照试验的目的是比较用于邀请患者进行阳性大肠镜检查(TC)的免疫化学粪便潜血试验(FIT +)阳性的不同方式的依从性。来自意大利的9个大肠癌筛查计划的FIT +患者被随机分配,首先通过邮件或电话邀请其参加TC,对于非并发症患者,通过邮件召回,与全科医生进行咨询或与专家筛查进行会谈从业者(护士或保健助理)。总共有3777名患者被随机分配了不同的邀请策略。通过邮件和电话进行初始邀请的遵守情况相似(86.0%比84.0%,相对风险-RR:1.02; 95%CI 0.97-1.08)。在未响应初次邀请的回复者中,通过专业医生预约的召回率为50.4%,显着高于通过邮件召回(38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01-1.76)或具有以下要求的人:与全科医生进行面对面的咨询(30.8%; RR:1.45; 95%CI 1.14-1.87)。最初通过邮件和电话邀请TC的邀请也是如此。在最初邀请的非投诉者中,与专家筛查从业者举行的个人会议与最高遵守率相关,而全科医生参与此特定活动的效果似乎较差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号