The Hybrid Screening Strategy Is Also Effective for Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Average-Risk Chinese Population

2008 ◽  
Vol 134 (1) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Jyh–Ming Liou ◽  
Jaw–Town Lin ◽  
Han–Mo Chiu ◽  
Ming–Shiang Wu
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Chinese Population ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Hybrid Screening

scholarly journals Modeling Individual Patient Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Their Tolerance for Complications Risk

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 204-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glen B. Taksler ◽  
Adam T. Perzynski ◽  
Michael W. Kattan
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy ◽  
Screening Method ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
National Guidelines

Introduction. Recommendations for colorectal cancer screening encourage patients to choose among various screening methods based on individual preferences for benefits, risks, screening frequency, and discomfort. We devised a model to illustrate how individuals with varying tolerance for screening complications risk might decide on their preferred screening strategy. Methods. We developed a discrete-time Markov mathematical model that allowed hypothetical individuals to maximize expected lifetime utility by selecting screening method, start age, stop age, and frequency. Individuals could choose from stool-based testing every 1 to 3 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy every 1 to 20 years with annual stool-based testing, colonoscopy every 1 to 20 years, or no screening. We compared the life expectancy gained from the chosen strategy with the life expectancy available from a benchmark strategy of decennial colonoscopy. Results. For an individual at average risk of colorectal cancer who was risk neutral with respect to screening complications (and therefore was willing to undergo screening if it would actuarially increase life expectancy), the model predicted that he or she would choose colonoscopy every 10 years, from age 53 to 73 years, consistent with national guidelines. For a similar individual who was moderately averse to screening complications risk (and therefore required a greater increase in life expectancy to accept potential risks of colonoscopy), the model predicted that he or she would prefer flexible sigmoidoscopy every 12 years with annual stool-based testing, with 93% of the life expectancy benefit of decennial colonoscopy. For an individual with higher risk aversion, the model predicted that he or she would prefer 2 lifetime flexible sigmoidoscopies, 20 years apart, with 70% of the life expectancy benefit of decennial colonoscopy. Conclusion. Mathematical models may formalize how individuals with different risk attitudes choose between various guideline-recommended colorectal cancer screening strategies.

scholarly journals A Population-Based Study of Prevalence and Adherence Trends in Average Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening, 1997 to 2008: Figure 1.

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 347-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela S. Sinicrope ◽  
Ellen L. Goode ◽  
Paul J. Limburg ◽  
Sally W. Vernon ◽  
Joseph B. Wick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Population Based Study

scholarly journals Colorectal Cancer Screening: Knowledge and Practice among Private General Practitioners in Northeast Peninsular Malaysia

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55
Author(s):  
Masliza Yusoff ◽  
Faridah Mohd Zin ◽  
Norwati Daud ◽  
Harmy Mohamed Yusoff ◽  
Nani Draman
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Occult Blood ◽  
Peninsular Malaysia ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Current Recommendation ◽  
Knowledge And Practice

Colorectal cancer screening is an important screening to detect colorectal cancer. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the knowledge, practice and its associated factors of colorectal cancer screening among private general practitioners (PGPs) in Northeast Peninsular Malaysia. Crosssectional study was conducted involving 127 PGPs in Kelantan. The study used a validated selfadministrated questionnaire that contained three domains. The domains were sociodemographic, knowledge and practice of colorectal cancer screening. The inclusion criterion was doctors working in a private clinic for more than six months, while the exclusion criteria were non-residential doctors and doctors practicing in private specialised clinics. Only 21.3% of PGPs had good knowledge and 3.9% had good practice on colorectal cancer screening. The duration of practice as a PGP was significantly associated with good practice for colorectal cancer screening. Only 58.3% were aware of the current recommendation on colorectal cancer screening. Most PGPs would refer patients for a colonoscopy, but screening with faecal occult blood test (FOBT) in average-risk patients was low. Only 4% of PGPs followed the recommended guidelines for colorectal cancer screening. The main reasons for not offering FOBT screening were patients’ refusal, patients were not regular patients of the doctor and the referral system for colonoscopy was found to be difficult. This study noted that knowledge and practice of colorectal cancer screening among PGPs were inadequate. Overcoming barriers for screening is important to promote colorectal cancer screening.

scholarly journals A Personalized Approach of Patient–Health Care Provider Communication Regarding Colorectal Cancer Screening Options

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 601-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Gabriela Sava ◽  
James G. Dolan ◽  
Jerrold H. May ◽  
Luis G. Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Health Care Provider ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Care Providers

Background. Current colorectal cancer screening guidelines by the US Preventive Services Task Force endorse multiple options for average-risk patients and recommend that screening choices should be guided by individual patient preferences. Implementing these recommendations in practice is challenging because they depend on accurate and efficient elicitation and assessment of preferences from patients who are facing a novel task. Objective. To present a methodology for analyzing the sensitivity and stability of a patient’s preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening options and to provide a starting point for a personalized discussion between the patient and the health care provider about the selection of the appropriate screening option. Methods. This research is a secondary analysis of patient preference data collected as part of a previous study. We propose new measures of preference sensitivity and stability that can be used to determine if additional information provided would result in a change to the initially most preferred colorectal cancer screening option. Results. Illustrative results of applying the methodology to the preferences of 2 patients, of different ages, are provided. The results show that different combinations of screening options are viable for each patient and that the health care provider should emphasize different information during the medical decision-making process. Conclusion. Sensitivity and stability analysis can supply health care providers with key topics to focus on when communicating with a patient and the degree of emphasis to place on each of them to accomplish specific goals. The insights provided by the analysis can be used by health care providers to approach communication with patients in a more personalized way, by taking into consideration patients’ preferences before adding their own expertise to the discussion.

1039 Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening Varies by Race/Ethnicity and Screening Strategy

2010 ◽  
Vol 138 (5) ◽  
pp. S-152
Author(s):  
John M. Inadomi ◽  
Sandeep Vijan ◽  
Nancy K. Janz ◽  
Angela Fagerlin ◽  
Jennifer P. Thomas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Race Ethnicity
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document