Literature DB >> 23486697

Patient-reported outcomes following flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer in a demonstration screening programme in the UK.

Kathryn A Robb1, Siu Hing Lo, Emily Power, Ines Kralj-Hans, Robert Edwards, Maggie Vance, Christian von Wagner, Wendy Atkin, Jane Wardle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening for colorectal cancer will be introduced into the National Cancer Screening Programmes in England in 2013. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from trial participants indicate high acceptability and no adverse physical or psychological consequences, but this may not generalize to routine screening in the community. This study examined PROMs in a community-based FS screening programme.
METHODS: Eligible adults aged 58-59 (n = 2016) registered at 34 London general practices were mailed a National Health Service-endorsed invitation to attend FS screening. Pain and side-effects were assessed in a 'morning-after' questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed in a three-month follow-up questionnaire. Anxiety, self-rated health and colorectal symptoms were assessed at prescreening and follow-up.
RESULTS: In total, 1020 people attended screening and were included in the current analyses, of whom 913 (90%) returned the morning-after questionnaire, and 674 (66%) the follow-up questionnaire. The prescreening questionnaire had been completed by 751 (74%) of those who attended. The majority (87%) of respondents reported no pain or mild pain, and the most frequent side-effect (wind) was only experienced more than mildly by 16%. Satisfaction was extremely high, with 98% glad they had the test; 97% would encourage a friend to have it. From prescreening to follow-up there were no changes in anxiety or self-rated health, and the number of colorectal symptoms declined. Satisfaction and changes in wellbeing were not moderated by gender, deprivation, ethnicity or screening outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: PROMs indicate high acceptability of FS screening in 58-59 year olds, with no adverse effects on colorectal symptoms, health status or psychological wellbeing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23486697     DOI: 10.1258/jms.2012.012129

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Screen        ISSN: 0969-1413            Impact factor:   2.136


  7 in total

1.  Long-Term Effectiveness of Sigmoidoscopy Screening on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Women and Men: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Øyvind Holme; Magnus Løberg; Mette Kalager; Michael Bretthauer; Miguel A Hernán; Eline Aas; Tor J Eide; Eva Skovlund; Jon Lekven; Jörn Schneede; Kjell Magne Tveit; Morten Vatn; Giske Ursin; Geir Hoff
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Do no harm: no psychological harm from colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Benedicte Kirkøen; Paula Berstad; Edoardo Botteri; Tone Lise Åvitsland; Alvilde Maria Ossum; Thomas de Lange; Geir Hoff; Tomm Bernklev
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 7.640

3.  Patient-reported outcomes associated with cancer screening: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ashley Kim; Karen C Chung; Christopher Keir; Donald L Patrick
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  Use of a 12 months' self-referral reminder to facilitate uptake of bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening in previous non-responders: a London-based feasibility study.

Authors:  Robert S Kerrison; Lesley M McGregor; Sarah Marshall; John Isitt; Nicholas Counsell; Jane Wardle; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Using Specialist Screening Practitioners (SSPs) to increase uptake of the Bowel Scope (Flexible Sigmoidoscopy) Screening Programme: a study protocol for a feasibility single-stage phase II trial.

Authors:  Lesley M McGregor; Hanna Skrobanski; Hayley Miller; Mary Ritchie; Lindy Berkman; Stephen Morris; Colin Rees; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  Pilot Feasibility Stud       Date:  2016-09-14

6.  Psychosocial consequences of skin cancer screening.

Authors:  Patricia Markham Risica; Natalie H Matthews; Laura Dionne; Jennifer Mello; Laura K Ferris; Melissa Saul; Alan C Geller; Francis Solano; John M Kirkwood; Martin A Weinstock
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2018-04-17

7.  The clinical utility of a comprehensive psychosomatic assessment in the program for colorectal cancer prevention: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Sara Gostoli; Maria Montecchiarini; Alessia Urgese; Francesco Ferrara; Anna Maria Polifemo; Liza Ceroni; Asia Gasparri; Chiara Rafanelli; Vincenzo Cennamo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.