Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorErban, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorZapka, Jane G.
dc.contributor.authorPuleo, Elaine
dc.contributor.authorVickers-Lahti, Maureen
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:01.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:52:45Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:52:45Z
dc.date.issued2001-02-10
dc.date.submitted2008-07-09
dc.identifier.citation<p>Eff Clin Pract. 2001 Jan-Feb;4(1):10-7.</p>
dc.identifier.issn1099-8128 (Print)
dc.identifier.pmid11234181
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/42116
dc.description.abstractCONTEXT: Professional organizations have published guidelines for colorectal cancer screening. Defining which patients are currently, or should be, screened is an important clinical and public health issue. OBJECTIVE: To document the prevalence of colorectal cancer screening and profile the tests patients have had. DESIGN/POPULATION: A random-digit telephone survey of Massachusetts adults, 50 years of age and older. OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of persons ever and currently tested by fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, barium enema, colonoscopy, or some combination of these tests. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of those contacted agreed to the telephone interview. Approximately 29% of the 1119 respondents had never had any currently accepted test, including 10% who reported having only a fecal occult blood test done in a provider's office and 19% who reported having no tests. At least 51% were currently tested by one or more tests for screening, diagnosis, or both. Another 10% were possibly current by colonoscopy or barium enema, both of which can be ordered for screening but are more commonly used to evaluate a problem, such as rectal bleeding, or for surveillance after identification of a polyp or other abnormality. An additional 11% had been tested at some point but were not current according to guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate assessment of rates of colorectal cancer screening is complex because of the multiple acceptable screening methods, the fact that patients may be tested for screening or diagnostic purposes, and the lack of adequate systems for tracking such testing. For accurate measurement, all methods must be assessed regardless of whether tests were ordered for screening, diagnosis, or surveillance.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=11234181&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.relation.urlhttp://ecp.acponline.org/janfeb01/erban.htm
dc.subjectBarium Sulfate
dc.subjectColonoscopy
dc.subjectColorectal Neoplasms
dc.subjectEnema
dc.subject*Guideline Adherence
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMass Screening
dc.subjectMassachusetts
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectOccult Blood
dc.subjectSigmoidoscopy
dc.subjectCommunity Health and Preventive Medicine
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectLife Sciences
dc.subjectMedicine and Health Sciences
dc.subjectPrimary Care
dc.titleColorectal cancer screening in Massachusetts: measuring compliance with current guidelines
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleEffective clinical practice : ECP
dc.source.volume4
dc.source.issue1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/oapubs/493
dc.identifier.contextkey544975
html.description.abstract<p>CONTEXT: Professional organizations have published guidelines for colorectal cancer screening. Defining which patients are currently, or should be, screened is an important clinical and public health issue.</p> <p>OBJECTIVE: To document the prevalence of colorectal cancer screening and profile the tests patients have had.</p> <p>DESIGN/POPULATION: A random-digit telephone survey of Massachusetts adults, 50 years of age and older.</p> <p>OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of persons ever and currently tested by fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, barium enema, colonoscopy, or some combination of these tests.</p> <p>RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of those contacted agreed to the telephone interview. Approximately 29% of the 1119 respondents had never had any currently accepted test, including 10% who reported having only a fecal occult blood test done in a provider's office and 19% who reported having no tests. At least 51% were currently tested by one or more tests for screening, diagnosis, or both. Another 10% were possibly current by colonoscopy or barium enema, both of which can be ordered for screening but are more commonly used to evaluate a problem, such as rectal bleeding, or for surveillance after identification of a polyp or other abnormality. An additional 11% had been tested at some point but were not current according to guidelines.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: Accurate assessment of rates of colorectal cancer screening is complex because of the multiple acceptable screening methods, the fact that patients may be tested for screening or diagnostic purposes, and the lack of adequate systems for tracking such testing. For accurate measurement, all methods must be assessed regardless of whether tests were ordered for screening, diagnosis, or surveillance.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathoapubs/493
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine
dc.source.pages10-7


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record