OBJECTIVES: Fecal occult blood screening is cost-effective, is easily administered to large groups of patients, and reduces mortality associated with colorectal cancer. Within our predominant African American and Latino inner city clinic populations, compliance with common screening procedures is suboptimal. A procedure with increased compliance is needed to adequately screen this population at high risk for colorectal cancer. The objective of this study was to compare the results of the 3-day at-home hemoccult test for occult blood to those of a hemoccult test performed from stool obtained at rectal examination in the office. METHODS: A total of 350 consecutive patients referred to the GI clinic of University Hospital or Jersey City Medical Center for colorectal cancer screening had both the 3-day at-home hemoccult test and an in-office hemoccult examination performed, followed by either sigmoidoscopy (for negative results) or by colonoscopy (for positive results). RESULTS: Patients were noncompliant with dietary restrictions, 3-day card return, follow-up appointments, and endoscopy with conventional screening methods. Decisions based on the in-office examination with direct scheduling of endoscopy significantly improved compliance with follow-up. There was no statistical difference between the two detection methods, suggesting that the in-office examination was the more effective screening test. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy based on an in-office hemoccult examination is an acceptable alternative to using the 3-day at-home stool collection to govern endoscopic choices. In a noncompliant inner city population, use of the in-office examination increased compliance with follow up, potentially allowing more patients exposure to screening.
OBJECTIVES: Fecal occult blood screening is cost-effective, is easily administered to large groups of patients, and reduces mortality associated with colorectal cancer. Within our predominant African American and Latino inner city clinic populations, compliance with common screening procedures is suboptimal. A procedure with increased compliance is needed to adequately screen this population at high risk for colorectal cancer. The objective of this study was to compare the results of the 3-day at-home hemoccult test for occult blood to those of a hemoccult test performed from stool obtained at rectal examination in the office. METHODS: A total of 350 consecutive patients referred to the GI clinic of University Hospital or Jersey City Medical Center for colorectal cancer screening had both the 3-day at-home hemoccult test and an in-office hemoccult examination performed, followed by either sigmoidoscopy (for negative results) or by colonoscopy (for positive results). RESULTS:Patients were noncompliant with dietary restrictions, 3-day card return, follow-up appointments, and endoscopy with conventional screening methods. Decisions based on the in-office examination with direct scheduling of endoscopy significantly improved compliance with follow-up. There was no statistical difference between the two detection methods, suggesting that the in-office examination was the more effective screening test. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy based on an in-office hemoccult examination is an acceptable alternative to using the 3-day at-home stool collection to govern endoscopic choices. In a noncompliant inner city population, use of the in-office examination increased compliance with follow up, potentially allowing more patients exposure to screening.