...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cancer: official journal for European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) [and] European Association for Cancer Research (EACR) >Screening for colorectal cancer: comparison of perceived test burden of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test, faecal immunochemical test and flexible sigmoidoscopy.
【24h】

Screening for colorectal cancer: comparison of perceived test burden of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test, faecal immunochemical test and flexible sigmoidoscopy.

机译:结肠直肠癌的筛查:基于愈创木脂的粪便潜血试验,粪便免疫化学试验和柔性乙状结肠镜检查的可察觉试验负担的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Perceived burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an important determinant of participation in subsequent screening rounds and therefore crucial for the effectiveness of a screening programme. This study determined differences in perceived burden and willingness to return for a second screening round among participants of a randomised population-based trial comparing a guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening. METHODS: A representative sample of the Dutch population (aged 50-74years) was randomised to be invited for gFOBT, FIT and FS screening. A random sample of participants of each group was asked to complete a questionnaire about test burden and willingness to return for CRC screening. RESULTS: In total 402/481 (84%) gFOBT, 530/659 (80%) FIT and 852/1124 (76%) FS screenees returned the questionnaire. The test was reported as burdensome by 2.5% of gFOBT, 1.4% of FIT and 12.9% of FS screenees (comparing gFOBT versus FIT p=0.05; versus FS p<0.001). In total 94.1% of gFOBT, 94.0% of FIT and 83.8% of FS screenees were willing to attend successive screening rounds (comparing gFOBT versus FIT p=0.84; versus FS p<0.001). Women reported more burden during FS screening than men (18.2% versus 7.7%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: FIT slightly outperforms gFOBT with a lower level of reported discomfort and overall burden. Both FOBTs are better accepted than FS screening. All three tests have a high level of acceptance, which may affect uptake of subsequent screening rounds and should be taken into consideration before implementing a CRC screening programme.
机译:背景:大肠癌(CRC)筛查的感知负担是参与后续筛查回合的重要决定因素,因此对于筛查计划的有效性至关重要。这项研究确定了基于人群的基于愈创木脂的粪便隐血试验(gFOBT),粪便免疫化学试验(FIT)和柔性乙状结肠镜检查(FS)的随机人群试验的参与者在感知负担和第二轮筛查意愿上的差异。 )筛选。方法:将荷兰人群(50-74岁)的代表性样本随机邀请进行gFOBT,FIT和FS筛查。每组参与者的随机样本被要求填写一份有关测试负担和返回CRC筛查意愿的问卷。结果:总共402/481(84%)gFOBT,530/659(80%)FIT和852/1124(76%)FS筛选者返回了问卷。 gFOBT的2.5%,FIT的1.4%和FS筛查者的12.9%报道了该试验的繁琐(比较gFOBT与FIT p = 0.05;与FS p <0.001)。共有94.1%的gFOBT,94.0%的FIT和83.8%的FS筛选者愿意参加连续的筛选轮次(比较gFOBT与FIT p = 0.84;而FS p <0.001)。在FS筛查中,女性报告的负担比男性多(18.2%对7.7%; p <0.001)。结论:FIT的表现略优于gFOBT,且不适感和总体负担较低。两种FOBT都比FS筛查更好。所有这三个测试的接受程度都很高,这可能会影响后续筛选回合的采用,因此在实施CRC筛选计划之前应将其考虑在内。

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