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
. 2006 Aug 28;12(32):5201-4.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i32.5201.

On attitudes about colorectal cancer screening among gastrointestinal specialists and general practitioners in the Netherlands

Affiliations

On attitudes about colorectal cancer screening among gastrointestinal specialists and general practitioners in the Netherlands

J S Terhaar Sive Droste et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To find out whether there are differences in attitudes about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among gastrointestinal (GI) specialists and general practitioners (GPs) and which method is preferred in a national screening program.

Methods: Four hundred and twenty Dutch GI specialists in the Netherlands and 400 GPs in Amsterdam were questioned in 2004. Questions included demographics, affiliation, attitude towards screening both for the general population and themselves, methods of screening, family history and individual risk.

Results: Eighty-four percent of the GI specialists returned the questionnaire in comparison to 32% of the GPs (P < 0.001). Among the GI specialists, 92% favoured population screening whereas 51% of GPs supported population screening (P < 0.001). Of the GI specialists 95% planned to be screened themselves, while 30% of GPs intended to do so (P < 0.001). Regarding the general population, 72% of the GI specialists preferred colonoscopy as the screening method compared to 27% of the GPs (P < 0.001). The method preferred for personal screening was colonoscopy in 97% of the GI specialists, while 29% of the GPs favoured colonoscopy (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Screening for CRC is strongly supported by Dutch GI specialists and less by GPs. The major health issue is possibly misjudged by GPs. Since GPs play a crucial role in a successful national screening program, CRC awareness should be realized by increasing knowledge about the incidence and mortality, thus increasing awareness of the need for screening among GPs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74–108. - PubMed
    1. Signaleringscommissie Kanker van KWF kanker bestrijding Vroege opsporing van dikkedarmkanker. Minder sterfte door bevolkingsonderzoek. KWF rapport. 4 A.D. Ref Type: Dutch Report
    1. Meyerhardt JA, Mayer RJ. Systemic therapy for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:476–487. - PubMed
    1. de Visser M, van Ballegooijen M, Bloemers SM, van Deventer SJ, Jansen JB, Jespersen J, Kluft C, Meijer GA, Stoker J, de Valk GA, et al. Report on the Dutch consensus development meeting for implementation and further development of population screening for colorectal cancer based on FOBT. Cell Oncol. 2005;27:17–29. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Towler B, Irwig L, Glasziou P, Kewenter J, Weller D, Silagy C. A systematic review of the effects of screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, hemoccult. BMJ. 1998;317:559–565. - PMC - PubMed