Suppr超能文献

替代技术在结直肠癌筛查中与粪便免疫化学试验和/或结肠镜检查的可接受性比较:系统评价。

Acceptability of alternative technologies compared with faecal immunochemical test and/or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review.

机构信息

Division of Population Medicine, 2112Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

8945Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

出版信息

J Med Screen. 2023 Mar;30(1):14-27. doi: 10.1177/09691413221109999. Epub 2022 Aug 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second largest cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Current CRC screening in various countries involves stool-based faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and/or colonoscopy, yet public uptake remains sub-optimal. This review assessed the literature regarding acceptability of alternative CRC screening modalities compared to standard care in average-risk adults.

METHOD

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane and Web of Science were conducted up to February 3, 2022. The alternative interventions examined were computed tomography colonography, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colon capsule endoscopy and blood-based biomarkers. Outcomes for acceptability were uptake, discomfort associated with bowel preparation, discomfort associated with screening procedure, screening preferences and willingness to repeat screening method. A narrative data synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Differences between intervention and comparison modalities in uptake did not reach statistical significance in most of the included studies. The findings do suggest FIT as being more acceptable as a screening modality than flexible sigmoidoscopy. There were no consistent significant differences in bowel preparation discomfort, screening procedure discomfort, screening preference and willingness to repeat screening between the standard care and alternative modalities.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence comparing standard colonoscopy and stool-based CRC screening with novel modalities does not demonstrate any clear difference in acceptability. Due to the small number of studies available and included in each screening comparison and lack of observed differences, further research is needed to explore factors influencing acceptability of alternative CRC modalities that might result in improvement in population uptake within different contexts.

摘要

目的

结直肠癌(CRC)是全球第三大常见癌症,也是癌症相关死亡的第二大主要原因。目前,各国的 CRC 筛查包括基于粪便的粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)和/或结肠镜检查,但公众接受程度仍不理想。本综述评估了与标准护理相比,替代 CRC 筛查方法在普通风险成年人中可接受性的相关文献。

方法

系统检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Cochrane 和 Web of Science,检索时间截至 2022 年 2 月 3 日。所检查的替代干预措施包括计算机断层结肠成像、柔性乙状结肠镜检查、结肠胶囊内镜检查和基于血液的生物标志物。可接受性的结果是接受度、与肠道准备相关的不适、与筛查程序相关的不适、筛查偏好和重复筛查方法的意愿。进行了叙述性数据综合。

结果

符合纳入标准的研究有 21 项。在大多数纳入的研究中,干预措施与比较方法在接受度方面的差异没有达到统计学意义。结果表明,FIT 作为一种筛查方法比柔性乙状结肠镜检查更被接受。在肠道准备不适、筛查程序不适、筛查偏好和重复筛查方法的意愿方面,标准护理和替代模式之间没有一致的显著差异。

结论

目前比较标准结肠镜检查和基于粪便的 CRC 筛查与新型方法的证据表明,在可接受性方面没有明显差异。由于每个筛查比较中可用和纳入的研究数量较少,并且没有观察到差异,因此需要进一步研究来探索影响替代 CRC 模式可接受性的因素,这可能会导致不同背景下人群接受度的提高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9925898/73a7b3e5465a/10.1177_09691413221109999-fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验