筛查状况作为结直肠癌筛查方法选择的决定因素:一项基于人群的知情调查。

IF 0.8 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Gastrointestinal Tumors Pub Date : 2021-04-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-05 DOI:10.1159/000512954
José Luis Sandoval, Allan Relecom, Cyril Ducros, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Beatrice Arzel, Idris Guessous
{"title":"筛查状况作为结直肠癌筛查方法选择的决定因素:一项基于人群的知情调查。","authors":"José Luis Sandoval,&nbsp;Allan Relecom,&nbsp;Cyril Ducros,&nbsp;Jean-Luc Bulliard,&nbsp;Beatrice Arzel,&nbsp;Idris Guessous","doi":"10.1159/000512954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Fecal blood testing is a noninvasive alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and is preferred by a substantial proportion of individuals. However, participant-related determinants of the choice of screening method, particularly up-to-date screening status, remain less studied. We aimed to determine if up-to-date screening status was related to choosing a fecal blood test over colonoscopy.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Participants in the population-based cross-sectional survey study Bus Santé in Geneva, Switzerland - aged 50-69 years.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey study using mailed questionnaires inquiring about CRC screening method of choice after providing information on advantages and disadvantages of both screening methods. We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between up-to-date CRC screening status and choosing fecal blood testing.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We included 1,227 participants. Thirty-eight percent of participants did not have up-to-date CRC screening. Overall, colonoscopy (54.9%) was preferred to fecal blood testing (45.1%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001) as screening method of choice. However, screening method choices differed between those with (65.6% colonoscopy and 34.4% fecal blood testing) and without up-to-date CRC screening (36.5% colonoscopy and 63.5% fecal blood testing). Not having up-to-date CRC screening was associated with a higher probability of choosing fecal blood testing as screening method (odds ratio = 2.6 [1.9; 3.7], <i>p</i> < 0.001) after adjustment for the aforementioned confounders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Not having up-to-date screening was independently associated with fecal blood testing as the preferred method for CRC screening. Proposing this method to this subpopulation, in a context of shared decision, could potentially increase screening uptake in settings where it is already high.</p>","PeriodicalId":45017,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal Tumors","volume":"8 2","pages":"63-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000512954","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening Status as a Determinant of Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Method: A Population-Based Informed Survey.\",\"authors\":\"José Luis Sandoval,&nbsp;Allan Relecom,&nbsp;Cyril Ducros,&nbsp;Jean-Luc Bulliard,&nbsp;Beatrice Arzel,&nbsp;Idris Guessous\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000512954\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Fecal blood testing is a noninvasive alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and is preferred by a substantial proportion of individuals. However, participant-related determinants of the choice of screening method, particularly up-to-date screening status, remain less studied. We aimed to determine if up-to-date screening status was related to choosing a fecal blood test over colonoscopy.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Participants in the population-based cross-sectional survey study Bus Santé in Geneva, Switzerland - aged 50-69 years.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey study using mailed questionnaires inquiring about CRC screening method of choice after providing information on advantages and disadvantages of both screening methods. We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between up-to-date CRC screening status and choosing fecal blood testing.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We included 1,227 participants. Thirty-eight percent of participants did not have up-to-date CRC screening. Overall, colonoscopy (54.9%) was preferred to fecal blood testing (45.1%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001) as screening method of choice. However, screening method choices differed between those with (65.6% colonoscopy and 34.4% fecal blood testing) and without up-to-date CRC screening (36.5% colonoscopy and 63.5% fecal blood testing). Not having up-to-date CRC screening was associated with a higher probability of choosing fecal blood testing as screening method (odds ratio = 2.6 [1.9; 3.7], <i>p</i> < 0.001) after adjustment for the aforementioned confounders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Not having up-to-date screening was independently associated with fecal blood testing as the preferred method for CRC screening. Proposing this method to this subpopulation, in a context of shared decision, could potentially increase screening uptake in settings where it is already high.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastrointestinal Tumors\",\"volume\":\"8 2\",\"pages\":\"63-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000512954\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastrointestinal Tumors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000512954\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/3/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal Tumors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000512954","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:粪便血液检测是结肠直肠癌(CRC)筛查中结肠镜检查的一种非侵入性替代方法,并且是相当比例个体的首选方法。然而,选择筛查方法的参与者相关决定因素,特别是最新的筛查状况,研究仍然较少。我们的目的是确定最新的筛查状态是否与选择粪便血液检查而不是结肠镜检查有关。背景:在瑞士日内瓦进行的以人口为基础的横断面调查研究中,参与者年龄在50-69岁之间。设计:在提供两种筛查方法的优缺点后,采用邮寄问卷的方式进行横断面调查研究。我们使用多变量logistic回归模型来确定最新CRC筛查状态与选择粪便血液检测之间的关系。主要结果:我们纳入了1227名参与者。38%的参与者没有进行最新的CRC筛查。总体而言,结肠镜检查(54.9%)优于粪便血液检查(45.1%)(p < 0.001)作为首选筛查方法。然而,筛查方法的选择在进行(65.6%结肠镜检查和34.4%粪便血液检查)和未进行最新CRC筛查(36.5%结肠镜检查和63.5%粪便血液检查)的人群之间存在差异。未进行最新的CRC筛查与选择粪便血液检测作为筛查方法的可能性较高相关(优势比= 2.6 [1.9;3.7], p < 0.001),校正上述混杂因素后。结论:未进行最新筛查与粪血检测作为CRC筛查的首选方法独立相关。在共同决策的背景下,对这一亚群提出这种方法,可能会增加筛查率已经很高的地区的筛查率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Screening Status as a Determinant of Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Method: A Population-Based Informed Survey.

Objectives: Fecal blood testing is a noninvasive alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and is preferred by a substantial proportion of individuals. However, participant-related determinants of the choice of screening method, particularly up-to-date screening status, remain less studied. We aimed to determine if up-to-date screening status was related to choosing a fecal blood test over colonoscopy.

Setting: Participants in the population-based cross-sectional survey study Bus Santé in Geneva, Switzerland - aged 50-69 years.

Design: Cross-sectional survey study using mailed questionnaires inquiring about CRC screening method of choice after providing information on advantages and disadvantages of both screening methods. We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between up-to-date CRC screening status and choosing fecal blood testing.

Key results: We included 1,227 participants. Thirty-eight percent of participants did not have up-to-date CRC screening. Overall, colonoscopy (54.9%) was preferred to fecal blood testing (45.1%) (p < 0.001) as screening method of choice. However, screening method choices differed between those with (65.6% colonoscopy and 34.4% fecal blood testing) and without up-to-date CRC screening (36.5% colonoscopy and 63.5% fecal blood testing). Not having up-to-date CRC screening was associated with a higher probability of choosing fecal blood testing as screening method (odds ratio = 2.6 [1.9; 3.7], p < 0.001) after adjustment for the aforementioned confounders.

Conclusions: Not having up-to-date screening was independently associated with fecal blood testing as the preferred method for CRC screening. Proposing this method to this subpopulation, in a context of shared decision, could potentially increase screening uptake in settings where it is already high.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gastrointestinal Tumors
Gastrointestinal Tumors GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Investigation of Novel Urinary Biomarkers in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk in a Predominantly African American Population: A Case-Control Study. Real-World Outcomes of FLOT versus CROSS Regimens for Patients with Oesophagogastric Cancers. Association between Serum Zinc Levels and Clinicopathological Characteristics in Patients with Gastric Cancer. Mixed Neuroendocrine and Non-Neuroendocrine Neoplasm of Pancreas: What Do We Know, What Have We Learnt? Mast Cell Sarcoma of Small Intestine, Early Diagnosis, and Good Prognosis: An Extremely Rare Case Report and Review of the Literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1