Douglas K Rex1, David A Lieberman. 1. Indiana University Hospital, University Boulevard, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA. drex@iupui.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Capsule colonoscopy might improve adherence to colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: Measure attractiveness of capsule colonoscopy in patients who have declined conventional colonoscopy, using patients who have undergone colonoscopy as a control group. DESIGN: Internet-based survey. SETTING: United States. SUBJECTS: A total of 308 geographically diverse, high school or higher educated, middle to upper income, insured internet users who had been offered colonoscopy previously. INTERVENTIONS: Survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Preferences for colonoscopy, capsule colonoscopy, fecal occult blood test, or no screening. RESULTS: After a description of capsule technology features relative to colonoscopy, including "no need for a ride," "no time off work," "approximately 5% less accurate," "booster preparation needed," and "follow-up colonoscopy needed in 20% of patients," preference for capsule colonoscopy was shown by 24% of those who had undergone colonoscopy and 49% of those who had not. "No need for a ride" and "no time off work" were considered positive features of capsule colonoscopy. The potential to undergo capsule colonoscopy during the weekend was also considered attractive. LIMITATIONS: Restricted population. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of capsule colonoscopy could potentially increase colorectal cancer screening adherence rates among patients who decline screening colonoscopy.
BACKGROUND: Capsule colonoscopy might improve adherence to colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: Measure attractiveness of capsule colonoscopy in patients who have declined conventional colonoscopy, using patients who have undergone colonoscopy as a control group. DESIGN: Internet-based survey. SETTING: United States. SUBJECTS: A total of 308 geographically diverse, high school or higher educated, middle to upper income, insured internet users who had been offered colonoscopy previously. INTERVENTIONS: Survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Preferences for colonoscopy, capsule colonoscopy, fecal occult blood test, or no screening. RESULTS: After a description of capsule technology features relative to colonoscopy, including "no need for a ride," "no time off work," "approximately 5% less accurate," "booster preparation needed," and "follow-up colonoscopy needed in 20% of patients," preference for capsule colonoscopy was shown by 24% of those who had undergone colonoscopy and 49% of those who had not. "No need for a ride" and "no time off work" were considered positive features of capsule colonoscopy. The potential to undergo capsule colonoscopy during the weekend was also considered attractive. LIMITATIONS: Restricted population. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of capsule colonoscopy could potentially increase colorectal cancer screening adherence rates among patients who decline screening colonoscopy.