首页> 外文期刊>Gut: Journal of the British Society of Gastroenterology >Burden of colonoscopy compared to non-cathartic CT-colonography in a colorectal cancer screening programme: Randomised controlled trial
【24h】

Burden of colonoscopy compared to non-cathartic CT-colonography in a colorectal cancer screening programme: Randomised controlled trial

机译:大肠癌筛查程序中结肠镜检查与非导流CT结肠造影的负担:随机对照试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: CT-colonography has been suggested to be less burdensome for primary colorectal cancer (CRC) screening than colonoscopy. To compare the expected and perceived burden of both in a randomised trial. Design: 8844 Dutch citizens aged 50-74 years were randomly invited for CRC screening with colonoscopy (n=5924) or CT-colonography (n=2920). Colonoscopy was performed after full colon lavage, or CT-colonography after limited bowel preparation (non-cathartic). All invitees were asked to complete the expected burden questionnaire before the procedure. All participants were invited to complete the perceived burden questionnaire 14 days later. Mean scores were calculated on 5-point scales. Results: Expected burden: 2111 (36%) colonoscopy and 1199 (41%) CT-colonography invitees completed the expected burden questionnaire. Colonoscopy invitees expected the bowel preparation and screening procedure to be more burdensome than CT-colonography invitees: mean scores 3.0±1.1 vs 2.3±0.9 (p<0.001) and 3.1±1.1 vs 2.2±0.9 (p<0.001). Perceived burden: 1009/1276 (79%) colonoscopy and 801/982 (82%) CT-colonography participants completed the perceived burden questionnaire. The full screening procedure was reported as more burdensome in CT-colonography than in colonoscopy: 1.8±0.9 vs 2.0±0.9 (p<0.001). Drinking the bowel preparation resulted in a higher burden score in colonoscopy (3.0±1.3 vs 1.7±1.0, p<0.001) while related bowel movements were scored more burdensome in CT-colonography (2.0±1.0 vs 2.2±1.1, p<0.001). Most participants would probably or definitely take part in a next screening round: 96% for colonoscopy and 93% for CT-colonography (p=0.99). Conclusion: In a CRC screening programme, colonoscopy invitees expected the screening procedure and bowel preparation to be more burdensome than CT-colonography invitees. In participants, CT-colonography was scored as more burdensome than colonoscopy. Intended participation in a next screening round was comparable.
机译:目的:CT结肠造影已被认为比结肠镜检查对原发性大肠癌(CRC)筛查的负担较小。在随机试验中比较两者的预期负担和感知负担。设计:随机邀请8844名年龄在50-74岁的荷兰公民通过结肠镜检查(n = 5924)或CT结肠造影(n = 2920)进行CRC筛查。完全灌洗后进行结肠镜检查,或有限肠道准备后(非导流)进行CT结肠镜检查。要求所有被邀请者在手术前完成预期的负担调查表。 14天后邀请所有参与者填写感知负担调查表。平均分数以5分制计算。结果:预期负担:2111(36%)结肠镜检查和1199(41%)CT结肠造影受邀者填写了预期负担问卷。结肠镜检查受检者期望肠道准备和筛查程序比CT结肠造影受检者更为繁重:平均评分3.0±1.1对2.3±0.9(p <0.001)和3.1±1.1对2.2±0.9(p <0.001)。感知负担:1009/1276(79%)结肠镜检查和801/982(82%)CT结肠造影参与者完成了感知负担问卷。据报道,与结肠镜检查相比,全面筛查程序在CT结肠镜检查中负担更大:1.8±0.9对2.0±0.9(p <0.001)。喝肠准备品在结肠镜检查中的负担得分更高(3.0±1.3比1.7±1.0,p <0.001),而相关的肠蠕动在CT结肠造影中则比较繁重(2.0±1.0比2.2±1.1,p <0.001) 。大多数参与者可能或肯定会参加下一轮筛查:结肠镜检查为96%,CT结肠镜检查为93%(p = 0.99)。结论:在CRC筛查程序中,结肠镜检查受检者期望筛查程序和肠道准备比CT结肠造影受检者负担更大。在参与者中,CT结肠造影比结肠镜检查更累人。预期参加下一轮筛选的情况是可比的。

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