Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 9

Patient willingness for repeat screening and preference for CT colonography and optical colonoscopy in ACRIN 6664: the National CT Colonography trial

Authors Gareen I, Siewert B, Vanness D, Herman B, Johnson CD, Gatsonis C

Received 30 January 2015

Accepted for publication 25 April 2015

Published 23 July 2015 Volume 2015:9 Pages 1043—1051

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S81901

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen

Ilana F Gareen,1,2 Bettina Siewert,3 David J Vanness,4 Benjamin Herman,2 CD Johnson,5 Constantine Gatsonis2,6

1Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA; 2Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA; 3Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; 4Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA; 5Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA; 6Department of Biostatistics, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA

Background: Current American Cancer Society recommendations for colon cancer screening include optical colonoscopy every 10 years or computed tomography colonography (CTC) every 5 years. Bowel preparation (BP) is currently required for both screening modalities.
Purpose: To compare ACRIN 6664: the National CT Colonography Trial (NCTCT) participant experiences with CTC and optical colonoscopy (OC), procedure preference, and willingness to return for each procedure.
Materials and methods: Participants from fifteen NCTCT sites, who underwent CTC followed by OC under sedation, were invited to complete questionnaires 2 weeks postexam, asking about procedure preference, physical discomfort, and embarrassment experienced and whether that discomfort and embarrassment was better or worse than expected during BP, CTC, and OC, as well as willingness to return for repeat CTC and OC at different time intervals.
Results: A total of 2,310 of 2,600 patients (89%) returned their questionnaires. Of patients reporting a preference, 1,058 (46.6%) preferred CTC, 569 (25.0%) preferred OC, and 626 (27.6%) reported no preference. Participant-reported discomfort worse than expected differed significantly between CTC (32.9%) and OC (5.0%) (P<0.001). About 79.3% were willing to be screened again with CTC in 5 years, and 96.6% with OC in 10 years. Discomfort and embarrassment worse than expected with OC were associated with increased intention to adhere with CTC in the future. Conversely, embarrassment experienced during CTC and discomfort worse than expected on CTC were associated with increased intention to adhere with OC in the future.
Conclusion: While a larger proportion of participants indicated that they preferred CTC to OC, willingness to undergo repeat CTC compared to OC was limited by unanticipated exam discomfort and embarrassment and CTC’s shorter screening interval.

Keywords: CT colonography, colonoscopy, bowel preparation, adherence, patient preference

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Readers of this article also read:

Development of an unsupportive social interaction scale for patients with diabetes

Baron-Epel O, Heymann AD, Friedman N, Kaplan G

Patient Preference and Adherence 2015, 9:1033-1041

Published Date: 23 July 2015

Polyetherimide-grafted Fe3O4@SiO2 nanoparticles as theranostic agents for simultaneous VEGF siRNA delivery and magnetic resonance cell imaging

Li T, Shen X, Chen Y, Zhang C, Yan J, Yang H, Wu C, Zeng H, Liu Y

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2015, 10:4279-4291

Published Date: 2 July 2015

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010