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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Jul;24(7):1477-86.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-014-3187-9. Epub 2014 May 13.

Non- or full-laxative CT colonography vs. endoscopic tests for colorectal cancer screening: a randomised survey comparing public perceptions and intentions to undergo testing

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Non- or full-laxative CT colonography vs. endoscopic tests for colorectal cancer screening: a randomised survey comparing public perceptions and intentions to undergo testing

Alex Ghanouni et al. Eur Radiol. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: Compare public perceptions and intentions to undergo colorectal cancer screening tests following detailed information regarding CT colonography (CTC; after non-laxative preparation or full-laxative preparation), optical colonoscopy (OC) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS).

Methods: A total of 3,100 invitees approaching screening age (45-54 years) were randomly allocated to receive detailed information on a single test and asked to return a questionnaire. Outcomes included perceptions of preparation and test tolerability, health benefits, sensitivity and specificity, and intention to undergo the test.

Results: Six hundred three invitees responded with valid questionnaire data. Non-laxative preparation was rated more positively than enema or full-laxative preparations [effect size (r) = 0.13 to 0.54; p < 0.0005 to 0.036]; both forms of CTC and FS were rated more positively than OC in terms of test experience (r = 0.26 to 0.28; all p-values < 0.0005). Perceptions of health benefits, sensitivity and specificity (p = 0.250 to 0.901), and intention to undergo the test (p = 0.213) did not differ between tests (n = 144-155 for each test).

Conclusions: Despite non-laxative CTC being rated more favourably, this study did not find evidence that offering it would lead to substantially higher uptake than full-laxative CTC or other methods. However, this study was limited by a lower than anticipated response rate.

Key points: • Improving uptake of colorectal cancer screening tests could improve health benefits • Potential invitees rate CTC and flexible sigmoidoscopy more positively than colonoscopy • Non-laxative bowel preparation is rated better than enema or full-laxative preparations • These positive perceptions alone may not be sufficient to improve uptake • Health benefits and accuracy are rated similarly for preventative screening tests.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Example pages from an information leaflet (non-laxative CTC)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, Saslow D, Shah M, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2011. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:8–30. doi: 10.3322/caac.20096. - DOI - PubMed
    1. von Wagner C, Baio G, Raine R, et al. Inequalities in participation in an organized national colorectal cancer screening programme: results from the first 2.6 million invitations in England. Int J Epidemiol. 2011;40:712–718. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyr008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. The NHS Information Centre for Health and Social Care (2012) Breast Screening Programme, England 2010–2011, p 1–127
    1. The NHS Information Centre for Health and Social Care (2011) Cervical screening programme, England 2010–2011, p 1–108
    1. de Haan MC, van Gelder RE, Graser A, Bipat S, Stoker J. Diagnostic value of CT-colonography as compared to colonoscopy in an asymptomatic screening population: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1747–1763. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2104-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources