Acceptability and side-effects of colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy in a screening setting

Author:

Senore Carlo1,Ederle Andrea2,Fantin Alberto2,Andreoni Bruno3,Bisanti Luigi4,Grazzini Grazia5,Zappa Marco6,Ferrero Franco6,Marutti Anna7,Giuliani Orietta8,Armaroli Paola1,Segnan Nereo1

Affiliation:

1. Centro Prevenzione Oncologica Regione Piemonte and Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria S. Giovanni Battista di Torino, Turin, Italy

2. Gastroenterology Unit, S Bonifacio Hospital, ULSS 20, Verona, Italy

3. Surgery Unit II, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan, Italy

4. Epidemiology Unit. ASL ‘Citta’ di Milano’, Milan Italy

5. Institute for Cancer Study and Prevention, Florence, Italy

6. Gastroenterology Unit, Infermi Hospital, ASL 12, Biella, Italy

7. Fondo Edo Tempia, Biella, Italy

8. Romagna Cancer Registry, Istituto Oncologico Romagnolo, Forlì, Italy

Abstract

Objective Quantitative information on adverse reactions associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests is useful to estimate the balance between benefit and risk in different strategies. Setting Six Italian screening centres. Methods Thirty-day active follow-up (interview about side-effects and acceptability of the screening procedure and review of hospital admissions) among average-risk people undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), total colonoscopy (TC), fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a multicentre randomized trial of CRC screening. Multivariable logistic models were used to assess determinants of completion rate and self-reported pain. Results The attendance rate following the first invitation and mail reminder was 28.2% (1696/6018) in the FS and 23.0% (1382/6021) in the TC arm. Response rate to the 30-day follow-up questionnaire was 88.6% (1502/1696) among people undergoing FS, and 86.7% (1198/1382) among those undergoing TC. The proportion of people complaining of serious reactions following bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR], 5.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.70–7.24) or reporting severe pain immediately after the exam (OR, 1.86; 95% CI 1.47–2.34) was higher for TC than for FS. The most common post-procedural complaints were abdominal distension and pain. People mentioning pain or bowel distension following preparation were more likely to report severe pain both after FS (OR, 2.13; 95% CI 1.52–2.97) and TC (OR: 2.03; 95% CI 1.41–2.90). The 30-day hospitalization rate was similar after FS, TC and FIT. Conclusions Screenees reported higher pain levels after TC than FS. The proportion of people complaining of severe side effects after discharge was similar. Bowel preparation was poorly tolerated by people undergoing TC. Subjects’ reactions to the bowel preparation was predictive of post-procedural discomfort. A commitment of at least 48 hours was required of people undergoing TC, compared with 3–4 for FS.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3