Literature DB >> 15605007

Prospective evaluation of screening colonoscopy: who is being screened?

Brian Bressler1, Charles Lo, Jack Amar, Scott Whittaker, Hugh Chaun, Lawrence Halparin, Robert Enns.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Universal access to medical procedures is deemed an advantage of the Canadian health care system. The purposes of this prospective study were to determine the degree to which the practice of colon cancer screening by colonoscopy differed among socioeconomic classes and to assess adherence to screening guidelines.
METHODS: Consecutive patients scheduled to undergo colonoscopy at a single center between August 2000 and August 2002 completed a questionnaire that determined patient characteristics and indications for the procedure. The patients were divided into two groups: screening patients, defined as individuals who indicated they were undergoing colonoscopy for screening purposes and were asymptomatic, and a control group, which comprised patients undergoing colonoscopy because of symptoms. Statistical analysis was performed to determine if patients in the screening group had different characteristics with respect to socioeconomic class, compared with the control group.
RESULTS: A total of 1088 patients completed the questionnaire: 707 (65%) had colonoscopy because of symptoms, compared with 381 (35%) who underwent a screening examination. Mean age and marital status were similar in both groups. Of all colonoscopy procedures, there was a significantly greater proportion of men undergoing colonoscopy for screening purposes: 199 (52.2%) vs. 294 (41.6%) in the symptomatic group ( p = 0.001). Based on the Cochran-Armitage test, patients in the screening group had significantly higher education levels ( p = 0.004) and household incomes ( p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Income and education level, two indices of socioeconomic status, are statistically significantly higher in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy compared with those having colonoscopy for any other reason.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15605007     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02231-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  8 in total

1.  Associations of physician supplies with colon cancer care in Ontario and California, 1996 to 2006.

Authors:  Kevin M Gorey; Isaac N Luginaah; Emma Bartfay; Karen Y Fung; Eric J Holowaty; Frances C Wright; Caroline Hamm; Sindu M Kanjeekal; Madhan K Balagurusamy
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-06-03       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 2.  When even people at high risk do not take up colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Gender disparities in colorectal cancer screening: true or false?

Authors:  Rachel A Callcut; Stephanie Kaufman; Robert Stone-Newsom; Patrick Remington; David Mahvi
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Effects of socioeconomic status on colon cancer treatment accessibility and survival in Toronto, Ontario, and San Francisco, California, 1996-2006.

Authors:  Kevin M Gorey; Isaac N Luginaah; Emma Bartfay; Karen Y Fung; Eric J Holowaty; Frances C Wright; Caroline Hamm; Sindu M Kanjeekal
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Attitude of the Italian general population towards prevention and screening of the most common tumors, with special emphasis on colorectal malignancies.

Authors:  Federica Domati; Estratios Travlos; Claudia Cirilli; Giuseppina Rossi; Piero Benatti; Massimiliano Marino; Giovanni Ponti; Maria Vandelli; Simone Valmori; Amal Oursana; Annalisa Pezzi; Maurizio Ponz de Leon
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 3.397

6.  Variations in reconstruction after radical cystectomy.

Authors:  John L Gore; Christopher S Saigal; Jan M Hanley; Matthias Schonlau; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  A comparison of colorectal cancer screening uptake among average-risk insured American Indian/Alaska Native and white women.

Authors:  David G Perdue; Jessica Chubak; Andy Bogart; Denise A Dillard; Eva Marie Garroutte; Dedra Buchwald
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2013-08

8.  Delivery of primary health care to persons who are socio-economically disadvantaged: does the organizational delivery model matter?

Authors:  Simone Dahrouge; William Hogg; Natalie Ward; Meltem Tuna; Rose Anne Devlin; Elizabeth Kristjansson; Peter Tugwell; Kevin Pottie
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 2.655

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.