A feces collection paper does not enhance participation in a fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program: randomized clinical trial

Maaike J. Denters, Marije Deutekom, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Paul M. Fockens, Evelien Dekker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleProfessional

14 Citations (Scopus)
1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Abstract: Discomfort with the collection of a stool sample is a frequently cited barrier for participation in fecal test-based colorectal cancer screening. The objective was to evaluate whether a feces collection paper enhances participation in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening program. Randomized clinical trial. Second round of a biannual Dutch FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program pilot. A random sample of 10 265 individuals from the general population, men and women aged 50-75 years at an average risk for colorectal cancer, was eligible for participation. Invitees were randomized to an FIT-only group (n=5136) or an FIT in combination with a feces collection paper group (n=5129). The main outcome measure was participation in screening. Overall, 5367 tests of 10 265 were returned (52%). In the FIT-only group, 2694 tests were returned [52%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 51-54%] versus 2673 tests in the collection paper group (52%; 95% CI: 51-54%). This difference in the participation rate was not significant (relative risk: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.97-1.04). A feces collection paper does not increase participation rates in FIT-based colorectal cancer screening. Future studies should explore other ways of facilitating participation in colorectal cancer screening programs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)299-304
JournalEuropean Journal of Cancer Prevention
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A feces collection paper does not enhance participation in a fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program: randomized clinical trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this