Literature DB >> 11280570

Differing attitudes toward virtual and conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: surveys among primary care physicians and potential patients.

T L Angtuaco1, G D Banaad-Omiotek, C W Howden.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate attitudes among primary care physicians and potential patients concerning "virtual" and conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.
METHODS: We sent 1000 questionnaires to primary care physicians by electronic or postal mail and administered 400 to potential patients. Questionnaires contained progressively detailed information about the tests and asked for choices based on information presented.
RESULTS: One hundred eight-eight primary care physicians and 323 potential patients were included. Results indicated the following: 76.6% of potential patients and 47.3% of physicians initially preferred virtual colonoscopy because of its noninvasive nature; 23.6% of potential patients and 52.9% of physicians valued the ability of conventional colonoscopy to visualize the mucosa directly; and 67.4% of potential patients and 51.6% of physicians preferred virtual colonoscopy because it does not require sedation. Considering all information, most potential patients preferred virtual to conventional colonoscopy (60.2% vs 25.7%), whereas more physicians preferred conventional to virtual colonoscopy (44.9% vs 30.3%). Additionally, 82.3% of potential patients would comply more with recommendations for colorectal cancer screening, and 61.7% of physicians would refer more patients for screening, if virtual colonoscopy was available.
CONCLUSIONS: Potential patients preferred virtual to conventional colonoscopy, whereas physicians favored conventional colonoscopy. Physicians placed more importance on the ability of conventional colonoscopy to visualize the mucosa directly, the opportunity for therapy, and cost. Potential patients were more encouraged than physicians by the availability of virtual colonoscopy for improving participation in colorectal cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11280570     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.03639.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  17 in total

Review 1.  Virtual magnetic resonance colonography.

Authors:  J F Debatin; T C Lauenstein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  The virtuosity of virtuality or how real is virtual colonography.

Authors:  H Herfarth; A G Schreyer
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Steven J Heitman; Braden J Manns; Robert J Hilsden; Andrew Fong; Stafford Dean; Joseph Romagnuolo
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Automatic colon segmentation with dual scan CT colonography.

Authors:  Hong Li; Peter Santago
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Magnetic resonance colonography for the detection of inflammatory diseases of the large bowel: quantifying the inflammatory activity.

Authors:  W M Ajaj; T C Lauenstein; G Pelster; G Gerken; S G Ruehm; J F Debatin; S C Goehde
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Utility of dark-lumen MR colonography for the assessment of extra-colonic organs.

Authors:  Waleed Ajaj; Stefan G Ruehm; Susanne C Ladd; Guido Gerken; Mathias Goyen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Sub-millisievert CT colonography: effect of knowledge-based iterative reconstruction on the detection of colonic polyps.

Authors:  Hyo-Jin Kang; Se Hyung Kim; Cheong-Il Shin; Ijin Joo; Hwaseong Ryu; Sang Gyun Kim; Jong Pil Im; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Preference for colonoscopy versus computerized tomographic colonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Michael Gluck; Geoffrey C Jiranek; Johannes Koch; Kris V Kowdley; Shayan Irani; Matthew Nguyen; Jason A Dominitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-06-15       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Colorectal neoplasm: magnetic resonance colonography with fat enema-initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Shuai Zhang; Jun-Wei Peng; Qiang-Ying Shi; Feng Tang; Min-Guo Zhong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Initial development of the Temporary Utilities Index: a multiattribute system for classifying the functional health impact of diagnostic testing.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; Jun Ying; James Stahl; Chung Yin Kong; Beverly Moy; Jessica Roy; Elkan Halpern
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.