We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Population based randomized study of uptake and yield of screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy compared with screening by faecal occult blood testing.
BMJ : British Medical Journal 1998 July 19
OBJECTIVES: To compare the feasibility of mass screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy with screening by faecal occult blood testing (Haemoccult) and both tests combined.
DESIGN: Patients were randomised to screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy, faecal blood testing, or both tests. The flexible sigmoidoscopy examinations were performed by a general practitioner.
SETTING: General practice.
SUBJECTS: 3744 patients aged 50-75 years.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Uptake, positive results, detection of neoplasia, complications, and recall for diagnostic colonoscopy.
RESULTS: Uptake was significantly higher in the flexible sigmoidoscopy group (46.6%) than in the faecal blood test group (31.6%; P<0.001) or than in the group having both tests (30.1%; P<0.001). Telephone reminders increased uptake of sigmoidoscopy to 61.8%. In total, 1116 sigmoidoscopy examinations were performed without major complication. Polyps were found in 19. 3% (95% confidence interval 17.0% to 21.6%) but only 6.8% (5.3% to 8. 3%) had adenomas and 2.4% (1.5% to 3.3%) "high risk" adenomas. Cancer was detected in four subjects. The faecal blood test yielded positive results in 0.8% (0.2% to 1.4%) but missed at least one cancer and 30 cases of adenoma which were found by sigmoidoscopy in the combined group. Use of histological criteria-shown elsewhere to correlate with future risk of colorectal cancer-to select "positive" patients could reduce recall for diagnostic colonoscopy from about 20% to less than 5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Some of the predicted obstacles to screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy are surmountable. Clear evidence relating to efficacy will be obtained only from a randomised controlled trial.
DESIGN: Patients were randomised to screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy, faecal blood testing, or both tests. The flexible sigmoidoscopy examinations were performed by a general practitioner.
SETTING: General practice.
SUBJECTS: 3744 patients aged 50-75 years.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Uptake, positive results, detection of neoplasia, complications, and recall for diagnostic colonoscopy.
RESULTS: Uptake was significantly higher in the flexible sigmoidoscopy group (46.6%) than in the faecal blood test group (31.6%; P<0.001) or than in the group having both tests (30.1%; P<0.001). Telephone reminders increased uptake of sigmoidoscopy to 61.8%. In total, 1116 sigmoidoscopy examinations were performed without major complication. Polyps were found in 19. 3% (95% confidence interval 17.0% to 21.6%) but only 6.8% (5.3% to 8. 3%) had adenomas and 2.4% (1.5% to 3.3%) "high risk" adenomas. Cancer was detected in four subjects. The faecal blood test yielded positive results in 0.8% (0.2% to 1.4%) but missed at least one cancer and 30 cases of adenoma which were found by sigmoidoscopy in the combined group. Use of histological criteria-shown elsewhere to correlate with future risk of colorectal cancer-to select "positive" patients could reduce recall for diagnostic colonoscopy from about 20% to less than 5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Some of the predicted obstacles to screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy are surmountable. Clear evidence relating to efficacy will be obtained only from a randomised controlled trial.
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