Jae Myung Cha1, Joung Il Lee, Kwang Ro Joo, Hyun Phil Shin, Jae Jun Park. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gang Dong Kyung Hee University Hospital, Kyung Hee University, 149 Sangil-dong, Gangdong-gu, Seoul 134-727, South Korea. dramc@hanmail.net
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) reduces CRC mortality; however, the acceptance rate of a colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT was not high. The aim of this study was therefore to determine whether a telephone reminder call could increase the acceptance rate of colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT. METHODS: We performed FITs for asymptomatic participants aged 50 years or older. For patients with a positive FIT, a colonoscopy was recommended via mailing notification only (control group) or via a telephone reminder call after mailing notification (intervention group). The calls informed patients about the significance of a positive FIT and encouraged a colonoscopy following positive FITs. RESULTS: The FIT results were positive in 90 of 8,318 patients who received FITs. Fifty patients were advised to receive colonoscopy via mailing notification only, and 40 patients were advised via both a telephone reminder call and a mailing notification. The acceptance rate of colonoscopy was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.038). The lesion-detection rate for an advanced neoplasia was also significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.046). According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, a telephone reminder was a significant determinant of colonoscopy acceptance in patients with a positive FIT (OR 4.33; 95% CI, 1.19-15.75; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone reminder calls in addition to mailing notification improved the acceptance rate of colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) reduces CRC mortality; however, the acceptance rate of a colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT was not high. The aim of this study was therefore to determine whether a telephone reminder call could increase the acceptance rate of colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT. METHODS: We performed FITs for asymptomatic participants aged 50 years or older. For patients with a positive FIT, a colonoscopy was recommended via mailing notification only (control group) or via a telephone reminder call after mailing notification (intervention group). The calls informed patients about the significance of a positive FIT and encouraged a colonoscopy following positive FITs. RESULTS: The FIT results were positive in 90 of 8,318 patients who received FITs. Fifty patients were advised to receive colonoscopy via mailing notification only, and 40 patients were advised via both a telephone reminder call and a mailing notification. The acceptance rate of colonoscopy was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.038). The lesion-detection rate for an advanced neoplasia was also significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.046). According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, a telephone reminder was a significant determinant of colonoscopy acceptance in patients with a positive FIT (OR 4.33; 95% CI, 1.19-15.75; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone reminder calls in addition to mailing notification improved the acceptance rate of colonoscopy in patients with a positive FIT.
Authors: J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham Journal: Lancet Date: 1996-11-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ronald E Myers; Randa Sifri; Terry Hyslop; Michael Rosenthal; Sally W Vernon; James Cocroft; Thomas Wolf; Jocelyn Andrel; Richard Wender Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jung Im Shim; Yeonju Kim; Mi Ah Han; Hoo-Yeon Lee; Kui Sun Choi; Jae Kwan Jun; Eun-Cheol Park Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-12-31 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Kui Son Choi; Jae Kwan Jun; Hoo-Yeon Lee; Myung-Il Hahm; Jae Hwan Oh; Eun-Cheol Park Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-05-21 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Mark W Reid; Folasade P May; Bibiana Martinez; Samuel Cohen; Hank Wang; Demetrius L Williams; Brennan M R Spiegel Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Kevin Selby; Christine Baumgartner; Theodore R Levin; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Joanne Schottinger; Christopher D Jensen; Jeffrey K Lee; Douglas A Corley Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: David Stock; Linda Rabeneck; Nancy N Baxter; Lawrence F Paszat; Rinku Sutradhar; Lingsong Yun; Jill Tinmouth Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Carrie M Nielson; Jennifer S Rivelli; Morgan J Fuoco; Victoria R Gawlik; Ricardo Jimenez; Amanda F Petrik; Gloria D Coronado Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2018-10-17