-
- Paul C Schroy and Timothy C Heeren.
- Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA 02118, USA. paul.schroy@bmc.org
- Am J Prev Med. 2005 Feb 1; 28 (2): 208-14.
PurposeStool-based DNA (SB-DNA) testing is an emerging colorectal cancer screening strategy that offers a convenient, noninvasive, and potentially more acceptable alternative to existing screening tests. The objectives of this study were to compare patient perceptions of SB-DNA testing, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), and colonoscopy, and elicit screening preferences.MethodsA prospective survey was conducted between August 2001 and March 2003 of asymptomatic, mostly average-risk subjects aged > or =50 years who were participating in a multicenter comparison of SB-DNA testing and FOBT for detecting colorectal neoplasia. Subjects completed a 25-item questionnaire within 48 hours after undergoing a colonoscopy, which served as the standard. Respondents were asked to rate each of the three screening tests on various prep- and test-related features, using a five-point ordinal scale or yes/no format, and to select a preferred strategy.ResultsA total of 4042 subjects completed the survey (84% response rate). SB-DNA testing received the same or higher mean ratings than FOBT for most prep- and test-related features. When compared with colonoscopy, SB-DNA testing received higher ratings for all prep- and test-related features except perceived accuracy, where colonoscopy was rated higher. Overall, a higher percentage of patients preferred SB-DNA testing (45%) to both FOBT (32%) and colonoscopy (15%) for routine screening (p <0.001); 8% had no preference.ConclusionsPatients willing to undergo colonoscopy, SB-DNA testing, and FOBT perceive SB-DNA testing to have a number of advantages over the other two tests. Moreover, many such patients prefer SB-DNA testing to FOBT and colonoscopy for routine screening.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.