OBJECTIVES: Although all international guidelines state that there is no indication to perform a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) in symptomatic patients, we believe the test is frequently used as a diagnostic test. The objective of this study was to investigate whether the current guidelines for FOBT use are being followed in the Netherlands. METHODS: The frequency of reasons for ordering a FOBT in 15 hospitals over a time period of 1 year was determined and the consequences of the test result on the diagnostic workup were determined by a retrospective search of electronic hospital charts. RESULTS: In 14 of the 15 hospitals a FOBT was available and totally 2993 FOBTs were performed in 1 year. A total of 201 electronic charts were retrieved. The FOBTs were ordered because of anaemia (41%), suspicion of rectal bleeding (17%), abdominal pain (14%), changed bowel habits (10%) or others (18%). A positive test result was found in 66 (33%) patients and a negative in 133 (66%). Respectively, 38% (25/66) of the patients with a positive and 41% (55/133) of the patients with a negative test result received a gastrointestinal follow-up investigation. In 25/80 investigations, a possible cause of rectal blood loss was detected, of which 13 had a positive FOBT result. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that current guidelines on FOBT use are not followed in the Netherlands and that a FOBT is often used as a diagnostic tool instead of a screening tool, thereby causing confusion and unnecessary delays in the diagnostic workup of patients.
OBJECTIVES: Although all international guidelines state that there is no indication to perform a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) in symptomatic patients, we believe the test is frequently used as a diagnostic test. The objective of this study was to investigate whether the current guidelines for FOBT use are being followed in the Netherlands. METHODS: The frequency of reasons for ordering a FOBT in 15 hospitals over a time period of 1 year was determined and the consequences of the test result on the diagnostic workup were determined by a retrospective search of electronic hospital charts. RESULTS: In 14 of the 15 hospitals a FOBT was available and totally 2993 FOBTs were performed in 1 year. A total of 201 electronic charts were retrieved. The FOBTs were ordered because of anaemia (41%), suspicion of rectal bleeding (17%), abdominal pain (14%), changed bowel habits (10%) or others (18%). A positive test result was found in 66 (33%) patients and a negative in 133 (66%). Respectively, 38% (25/66) of the patients with a positive and 41% (55/133) of the patients with a negative test result received a gastrointestinal follow-up investigation. In 25/80 investigations, a possible cause of rectal blood loss was detected, of which 13 had a positive FOBT result. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that current guidelines on FOBT use are not followed in the Netherlands and that a FOBT is often used as a diagnostic tool instead of a screening tool, thereby causing confusion and unnecessary delays in the diagnostic workup of patients.
Authors: Stephen Ip; AbdulRazaq A H Sokoro; Lisa Kaita; Claudia Ruiz; Elaine McIntyre; Harminder Singh Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2014-10