We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Accuracy of screening for fecal occult blood on a single stool sample obtained by digital rectal examination: a comparison with recommended sampling practice.
Annals of Internal Medicine 2005 January 19
BACKGROUND: Many expert panels recommend colorectal cancer screening for average-risk asymptomatic individuals older than 50 years of age. Recent studies have found that 24% to 64% of primary care providers use only the digital fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as their primary screening test. The effectiveness of a single digital FOBT is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of digital FOBT and the recommended 6-sample at-home FOBT for advanced neoplasia in asymptomatic persons.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: 13 Veterans Affairs medical centers.
PATIENTS: 3121 asymptomatic patients 50 to 75 years of age.
INTERVENTION: 2665 patients had 6-sample at-home FOBT and digital FOBT, followed by complete colonoscopy.
MEASUREMENTS: We measured the sensitivity of digital and 6-sample FOBT for advanced neoplasia and the specificity for no neoplasia. We calculated predictive values and likelihood ratios for advanced neoplasia, defined as tubular adenomas 10 mm or greater, adenomas with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer.
RESULTS: Of all participants, 96.8% were men; their average age was 63.1 years. The 6-sample FOBT and the single digital FOBT had specificities of 93.9% and 97.5%, respectively, as defined by studying 1656 patients with no neoplasia. Sensitivities for detection of advanced neoplasia in 284 patients were 23.9% for the 6-sample FOBT and 4.9% for the digital FOBT. The likelihood ratio for advanced neoplasia was 1.68 (95% CI, 0.96 to 2.94) for positive results on digital FOBT and 0.98 (CI, 0.95 to 1.01) for negative results.
LIMITATIONS: Most patients were men.
CONCLUSIONS: Single digital FOBT is a poor screening method for colorectal neoplasia and cannot be recommended as the only test. When digital FOBT is performed as part of a primary care physical examination, negative results do not decrease the odds of advanced neoplasia. Persons with these results should be offered at-home 6-sample FOBT or another type of screening test.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of digital FOBT and the recommended 6-sample at-home FOBT for advanced neoplasia in asymptomatic persons.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: 13 Veterans Affairs medical centers.
PATIENTS: 3121 asymptomatic patients 50 to 75 years of age.
INTERVENTION: 2665 patients had 6-sample at-home FOBT and digital FOBT, followed by complete colonoscopy.
MEASUREMENTS: We measured the sensitivity of digital and 6-sample FOBT for advanced neoplasia and the specificity for no neoplasia. We calculated predictive values and likelihood ratios for advanced neoplasia, defined as tubular adenomas 10 mm or greater, adenomas with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer.
RESULTS: Of all participants, 96.8% were men; their average age was 63.1 years. The 6-sample FOBT and the single digital FOBT had specificities of 93.9% and 97.5%, respectively, as defined by studying 1656 patients with no neoplasia. Sensitivities for detection of advanced neoplasia in 284 patients were 23.9% for the 6-sample FOBT and 4.9% for the digital FOBT. The likelihood ratio for advanced neoplasia was 1.68 (95% CI, 0.96 to 2.94) for positive results on digital FOBT and 0.98 (CI, 0.95 to 1.01) for negative results.
LIMITATIONS: Most patients were men.
CONCLUSIONS: Single digital FOBT is a poor screening method for colorectal neoplasia and cannot be recommended as the only test. When digital FOBT is performed as part of a primary care physical examination, negative results do not decrease the odds of advanced neoplasia. Persons with these results should be offered at-home 6-sample FOBT or another type of screening test.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app