Literature DB >> 8692065

Flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk subjects: a community-based pilot project.

J K Olynyk1, S Aquilia, D R Fletcher, J A Dickinson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test a pilot screening program for colorectal cancer.
DESIGN: Subjects, chosen at random and recruited by mail, were examined by flexible sigmoidoscopy. PARTICIPANTS AND
SETTING: Normal-risk, asymptomatic men and women aged 55-59 years recruited from the community, July to December, 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of polyps detected and cancers diagnosed, and compliance with screening.
RESULTS: Letters of invitation were sent to 3500 subjects; of these, 2881 were eligible for inclusion in the study and 342 (12%) consented to participate. A further 3.5% of non-compliant subjects attended the screening program after a telephone survey assessing reasons for non-attendance. Common reasons for non-attendance were a lack of interest (30%) or a lack of time, mainly due to work commitments (28%). A third of subjects had polyps and 46% of these were adenomas. Three subjects were found to have adenocarcinoma: in two the cancer was confined to a polyp and treated with polypectomy, and one subject underwent anterior resection (overall prevalence of cancer, 0.9%). The median depth of insertion achieved with flexible sigmoidoscopy was 55 cm (range, 25-100 cm). Median pain level (on a scale of 0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) was 2 (range, 0-8.5), and 99% of the subjects would have the test again if required.
CONCLUSIONS: Flexible sigmoidoscopy was well tolerated and had an acceptable detection rate of adenomatous polyps and early cancer. Subject compliance emerged as a major issue which requires further evaluation to maximise participation in future programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8692065     DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1996.tb124851.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   7.738


  7 in total

1.  Perception of Colorectal Cancer Risk does not Enhance Participation in Screening.

Authors:  Keith Dear; Leitha Scott; Sharon Chambers; Mike C Corbett; Doug Taupin
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.409

2.  Barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a case-control study.

Authors:  Shan-Rong Cai; Su-Zhan Zhang; Hong-Hong Zhu; Shu Zheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Acceptance of flexible sigmoidoscopy as a screening examination for colorectal cancer in an outpatient clinic.

Authors:  S Gölder; W Vogt; H Lichti; H C Rath; A Kullmann; J Schölmerich; F Kullmann
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Improving uptake of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening: a randomized trial of nonparticipant reminders in the English Screening Programme.

Authors:  Robert S Kerrison; Lesley M McGregor; Sarah Marshall; John Isitt; Nicholas Counsell; Colin J Rees; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 10.093

5.  Workplace colorectal cancer-screening awareness programs: an adjunct to primary care practice?

Authors:  Akshay Bagai; Karen Parsons; Brenda Malone; Julian Fantino; Lawrence Paszat; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2007-06

6.  The preference for an endoscopist specific sex: a link between ethnic origin, religious belief, socioeconomic status, and procedure type.

Authors:  Adi Lahat; Yehudith Assouline-Dayan; Lior H Katz; Herma H Fidder
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 2.711

7.  Reasons for noncompliance with five-yearly screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  Charlie Henri Viiala; John Kevin Olynyk
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2008-02-02       Impact factor: 2.711

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.