A Comparison of Patient Acceptance and Preferences Between CT Colonography and Conventional Colonoscopy in Colorectal Cancer Screening

Abstract

Background/Aims Colorectal cancer, one of the most common cancers in developed countries, is curable when diagnosed at an early stage. However, for better screening, both a test that patients will tolerate and diagnostic accuracy are required. We compared patient experiences and preferences between computed tomographic (CT) colonography and conventional colonoscopy (CC) under conscious sedation. Methods Patients referred to the gastrointestinal clinic for CC were enrolled to also undergo CT colonography prior to CC. After each procedure, patients completed a questionnaire in which variables, such as abdominal pain, abdominal discomfort, and loss of dignity, were assessed using a 7-point Likert scale, with the highest score representing the worst experience. To verify response stability, a telephone questionnaire followed within 24 h after each procedure. Patients were then asked about their preference for CT colonography or CC. Results Data were collected from 51 patients who fulfilled all requirements, including CT colonography, CC, the two questionnaires after each procedure, and a follow-up questionnaire. Severity of abdominal pain, abdominal discomfort, and a loss of dignity were reported to be higher in CT colonography than in CC ( p <0.01). In addition, the preference for CC was significantly higher than that for CT colonography ( p <0.01). Conclusions Although CT colonography is a safe and noninvasive screening test for colorectal cancer, further study is required to increase patient acceptance.

The burden of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) performed with the patient under conscious sedation

“…These authors found that better pain control and optimal quality of information before the ERCP positively influenced patient satisfaction. In a study on the burden of colonoscopy, patients reported a mean score of 1.20 for pain and 1.31 for discomfort on a 7-point Likert scale [15]. Although the results of the aforementioned studies cannot be extrapolated to our results, they confirm our findings that ERCP is burdensome to patients.…”

Burden of colonoscopy compared to non-cathartic CT-colonography in a colorectal cancer screening programme: randomised controlled trial

“…This study showed higher pain and embarrassment scores in the CT-colonography group (n=38 participants) than in the colonoscopy group (n=63 participants) 25. As far as we know, other studies comparing the perceived burden of both techniques used non-randomised tandem designs and were therefore not comparable to our study 7 8 26…”

Comparison of CT Colonography with Conventional Colonoscopy in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

“…In our study, patients showed better tolerance to CTC and had less discomfort as compared to CC. This has also been shown by studies performed previously (4). CTC is well tolerated in patients aged >60 years in whom colonoscopy is contraindicated or incomplete, despite the presence of sigmoid diverticular disease or colonic redundancy (15,16).…”

“…A seven-point Likert scale was used, with the highest score representing the most unfavorable feeling: 7, strongly dislike; 6, dislike; 5, somewhat dislike; 4, undecided; 3, somewhat like; 2, like; 1, strongly like, and the findings were compared (4). Questions about the preferred examination were also asked.…”