Patient acceptability and psychologic consequences of CT colonography compared with those of colonoscopy: Results from a multicenter randomized controlled trial of symptomatic patients

Radiology

Volumn 263, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 723-731

  Von Wagner, Christian ^a   Ghanouni, Alex ^a   Halligan, Steve ^a   Smith, Samuel ^a   Dadswell, Edward ^b   Lilford, Richard J ^c   Morton, Dion ^c   Atkin, Wendy ^b   Wardle, Jane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVERSE OUTCOME; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISTRESS SYNDROME; EMOTIONALITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 84862501841     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12111523     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Thompson MR, Perera R, Senapati A, Dodds S. Predictive value of common symptom combinations in diagnosing colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2007;94(10): 1260-1265. (Pubitemid 47584776)
2. Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Mariotto AB, et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Ann Intern Med 2009;150(12):849-857.
3. Thomeer M, Bielen D, Vanbeckevoort D, et al. Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue? Eur Radiol 2002;12(6):1410-1415. (Pubitemid 36940216)
4. van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J, et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology 2004;233(2):328-337. (Pubitemid 39423788)
5. Rockey DC. Computed tomographic colonography: current perspectives and future directions. Gastroenterology 2009; 137(1):7-14.
6. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R. Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection - systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 2011;259(2):393-405.
7. Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Kulin NA, et al. How do physician assessments of patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests differ from actual preferences? a comparison in Canada and the United States using a stated-choice survey. Health Econ 2009;18(12):1420-1439.
8. von Wagner C, Knight K, Halligan S, et al. Patient experiences of colonoscopy, barium enema and CT colonography: a qualitative study. Br J Radiol 2009;82(973):13-19.
9. Halligan S, Lilford RJ, Wardle J, et al. Design of a multicentre randomized trial to evaluate CT colonography versus colonoscopy or barium enema for diagnosis of colonic cancer in older symptomatic patients: the SIGGAR study. Trials 2007;8:32.
10. Medical Research Council. MRC guidelines for good clinical practice. http://www.mrc. ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index. htm?d=MRC002416. Published 1998.
11. von Wagner C, Smith S, Halligan S, et al. Patient acceptability of CT colonography compared with double contrast barium enema: results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial of symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 2011;21(10):2046-2055.
12. Noble M, McLennan D, Wilkinson K, Barnes H. The English indices of deprivation 2007. London, England: Communities and Local Government, 2007.
13. Salmon P, Shah R, Berg S, Williams C. Evaluating customer satisfaction with colonoscopy. Endoscopy 1994;26(4):342-346. (Pubitemid 24187815)
14. Cockburn J, De Luise T, Hurley S, Clover K. Development and validation of the PCQ: a questionnaire to measure the psychological consequences of screening mammography. Soc Sci Med 1992;34(10):1129-1134.
15. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 1988;54(6):1063-1070.
16. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Boston, Mass: Allyn & Bacon, 2007.
17. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, et al. Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology 2003;227(2): 378-384. (Pubitemid 36514750)
18. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, Bassett P, Vance M, Bartram CI. Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonography compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(4): 913-921. (Pubitemid 37151766)
19. von Wagner C, Halligan S, Atkin WS, Lilford RJ, Morton D, Wardle J. Choosing between CT colonography and colonoscopy in the diagnostic context: a qualitative study of influences on patient preferences. Health Expect 2009;12(1):18-26.
20. Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health 2007;10(5):415-430. (Pubitemid 47481113)
21. Nayaradou M, Berchi C, Dejardin O, Launoy G. Eliciting population preferences for mass colorectal cancer screening organization. Med Decis Making 2010;30(2):224-233.
22. Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care 2008;46(9 suppl 1):S10-S16.
23. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 2008;359(12):1207-1217.