Literature DB >> 12650790

Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation.

Stephen L Ristvedt1, Elizabeth G McFarland, Leonard B Weinstock, Eric P Thyssen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine patient pre-examination expectations and postexamination appraisals for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy and bowel preparation.
METHODS: Prospective evaluation of 120 patients at defined risk for colorectal neoplasia was performed with CT colonography followed by colonoscopy on the same day. Subjects were stratified by age and sex (67 women and 53 men) and were randomized to receive either manual air (n = 61) or CO(2) (n = 59) insufflation during CT colonography. Patients' expectations were assessed just before the two examinations, and appraisals were assessed 2 to 3 days afterward regarding pain/discomfort, embarrassment, difficulty, overall assessment, preference for future testing, and bowel preparation.
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in appraisals of manual air versus CO(2) insufflation techniques. For both CT colonography and colonoscopy, patients' appraisals after the procedure were significantly more positive than prior expectations. Patients expressed more favorable appraisals of colonoscopy for pain (p < 0.001) and embarrassment (p < 0.001), with most responses being "none" to "a little" for both examinations. Overall appraisals of the tests were favorable and similar between CT and colonoscopy: patients mainly expressed "not unpleasant" to "a little unpleasant" (95%, 114/120 for both examinations). Overall, appraisal of the bowel preparation was the most negative. Preferences for future testing were more favorable toward CT: of the patients, 58% (69/120) preferred CT, 14% (17/120) preferred colonoscopy, and 28% (34/120) had no preference.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall appraisals were similar and positive for both CT colonography and colonoscopy, with less favorable appraisals of the bowel preparation. Most patients stated that they would prefer CT for future evaluation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12650790     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07302.x

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


  50 in total

1.  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

2.  Virtual colonoscopy vs optical colonoscopy.

Authors:  Zhengrong Liang; Robert Richards
Journal:  Expert Opin Med Diagn       Date:  2010-03-01

3.  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

Review 4.  Current status of CT colonography.

Authors:  Suzanne M Frentz; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  The elephant in the room: bowel preparation for CT colonography.

Authors:  Ronald Summers
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 6.  How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences?

Authors:  Christopher A K Y Chong; Ing-je Chen; Gary Naglie; Murray D Krahn
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Structure-analysis method for electronic cleansing in cathartic and noncathartic CT colonography.

Authors:  Wenli Cai; Michael E Zalis; Janne Näppi; Gordon J Harris; Hiroyuki Yoshida
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Calprotectin as a diagnostic tool for inflammatory bowel diseases.

Authors:  Marianthi Chatzikonstantinou; Panagiotis Konstantopoulos; Spyros Stergiopoulos; Konstantinos Kontzoglou; Christos Verikokos; Despina Perrea; Dimitris Dimitroulis
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2016-09-07

9.  Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): climax of a new era of validation and transition into community practice.

Authors:  Jacob Thomas; Jeffrey Carenza; Elizabeth McFarland
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2008-08

10.  Predictors of CT colonography utilization among asymptomatic medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Hanna M Zafar; Jianing Yang; Michael Harhay; Anna Lev-Toaff; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.