Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1999 Jul;14(7):432-7.
doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00018.x.

Patient preferences for colon cancer screening

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Patient preferences for colon cancer screening

M Pignone et al. J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To measure patient preferences for four different screening strategies: annual fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) alone; flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) every 5 years alone; both annual FOBT and FSIG every 5 years; or no screening.

Design: Survey.

Setting: University internal medicine clinic.

Patients: Convenience sample of 146 adults (aged 50-75 years) with no previous history of colon cancer.

Intervention: Three-part educational program on colon cancer screening administered verbally by trained research assistants.

Measurements and main results: Patient preferences for screening were measured at three points: after descriptive information about colon cancer and screening options (testing procedure information); after information about test performance but with no out-of-pocket costs (test performance information); and finally with hypothetical out-of-pocket costs (cost information). After only descriptive test information, the most popular strategies were FOBT alone (45%) or both tests (38%). Fewer patients preferred FSIG alone (13%). After information about test performance, more subjects preferred both tests (47%), and fewer subjects preferred FOBT alone (36%) (p =.12). With hypothetical out-of-pocket costs, the proportion preferring FOBT alone increased to 53%, while those preferring both tests decreased to 31% (p <.001). Less than 5% of patients preferred no screening.

Conclusions: Patient preferences for colon cancer screening were modestly sensitive to information about test performance and strongly sensitive to out-of-pocket costs. The heterogeneity of patients' preferences for how to be screened supports informed shared decision making as a possible means of improving colon cancer screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. US Preventive Health Services Task Force. Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. 2nd ed. Alexandria, Va: International Medical Publishing; 1996.
    1. Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:594–642. - PubMed
    1. Mandel J, Bond J, Church T, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–71. - PubMed
    1. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen D, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. 1996;348:1467–71. - PubMed
    1. Hardcastle J, Chamberlain J, Robinson M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996;348:1472–7. - PubMed

Publication types