98 research outputs found

    Readability of Colorectal Cancer Online Information: A Brief Report

    Full text link
    Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. A decline in deaths caused by CRC has been largely attributable to screening and prompt treatment. Motivation, shown to influence cancer-related screening and treatment decisions, can be shaped by information from the Internet. The extent to which this information is easily readable on cancer-related websites is not known. The purpose of this study was to assess the readability levels of CRC information on 100 websites. Methods: Using methods from a prior study, the keyword, “colorectal cancer,” was searched on a cleared Internet browser. Scores for each website (n = 100) were generated using five commonly recommended readability tests. Results: All five tests demonstrated difficult readability for the majority of the websites. Conclusions: Online information related to CRC is difficult to read and highlights the need for developing cancer-related online material that is understandable to a wider audience

    Split dose and MiraLAX-based purgatives to enhance bowel preparation quality becoming common recommendations in the US

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Rates of suboptimal bowel preparation up to 30% have been reported. Liberalized precolonoscopy diet, split dose purgative, and the use of MiraLAX-based bowel preparation (MBBP) prior to colonoscopy are recently developed measures to improve bowel preparation quality but little is known about the utilization prevalence of these measures. We examined the patterns of utilization of these newer approaches to improve precolonoscopy bowel preparation quality among American gastroenterologists. Methods: Surveys were distributed to a random sample of members of the American College of Gastroenterologists. Participants were queried regarding demographics, practice characteristics, and bowel preparation recommendations including recommendations for liberal dietary restrictions, split dose purgative, and the use of MBBP. Approaches were evaluated individually and in combination. Results: Of the 999 eligible participants, 288 responded; 15.2% recommended a liberal diet, 60.0% split dose purgative, and 37.4% MBBP. Diet recommendations varied geographically with gastroenterologists in the West more likely to recommend a restrictive diet (odds ratio [OR] 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–7.67) and physicians in the Northeast more likely to recommend a liberal diet more likely. Older physicians more often recommended split dosing (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.04–2.97). Use of MBBP was more common in suburban settings (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.23–3.73). Evidence suggests that physicians in private practice were more likely to prescribe split dosing (p = 0.03) and less often recommended MBBP (p = 0.02). Likelihood of prescribing MBBP increased as weekly volume of colonoscopy increased (p = 0.03). Conclusions: To enhance bowel preparation quality American gastroenterologists commonly use purgative split dosing. The use of MBBP is becoming more prevalent while a liberalized diet is infrequently recommended. Utilization of these newer approaches to improve bowel preparation quality varies by physician and practice characteristics. Further evaluation of the patterns of usage of these measures is indicated

    Shortened surveillance intervals following suboptimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy: Results of a national survey

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Suboptimal bowel preparation can result in decreased neoplasia detection, shortened surveillance intervals, and increased costs. We assessed bowel preparation recommendations and the relationship to self-reported proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations in practice; and evaluated the impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on colonoscopy surveillance practices. A random sample of a national organization of gastroenterologists in the U.S. was surveyed. Methods: Demographic and practice characteristics, bowel preparation regimens, and proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations in practice were ascertained. Recommended follow-up colonoscopy intervals were evaluated for optimal and suboptimal bowel preparation and select clinical scenarios. Results: We identified 6,777 physicians, of which 1,354 were randomly selected; 999 were eligible, and 288 completed the survey. Higher proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations/week (≥10 %) was associated with hospital/university practice, teaching hospital affiliation, greater than 25 % Medicaid insured patients, recommendation of PEG alone and sulfate-free. Those reporting greater than 25 % Medicare and privately insured patients, split dose recommendation, and use of MoviPrep® were associated with a less than 10 % suboptimal bowel preparations/week. Shorter surveillance intervals for three clinical scenarios were reported for suboptimal preparations and were shortest among participants in the Northeast who more often recommended early follow-up for normal findings and small adenomas. Those who recommended 4-l PEG alone more often advised less than 1 year surveillance interval for a large adenoma. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates significantly shortened surveillance interval recommendations for suboptimal bowel preparation and that these interval recommendations vary regionally in the United States. Findings suggest an interrelationship between dietary restriction, purgative type, and practice and patient characteristics that warrant additional research

    Gastroenterologists' Perceived Barriers to Optimal Pre-Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation: Results of a National Survey

    Get PDF
    Poor quality bowel preparation has been reported in almost one third of all colonoscopies. To better understand factors associated with poor bowel preparation, we explored perceived patient barriers to optimal pre-colonoscopy bowel preparation from the perspective of the gastroenterologist. A random sample of physician members of the American College of Gastroenterology was surveyed via the internet and postal mailing. Demographic and practice characteristics and practice-related and perceived patient barriers to optimal bowel preparation were assessed among 288 respondents. Lack of time, no patient education reimbursement, and volume of information were not associated with physician level of suboptimal bowel preparation. Those reporting greater than or equal to 10 % suboptimal bowel preparations were more likely to believe patients lack understanding of the importance of following instructions, have problems with diet, and experience trouble tolerating the purgative. Bowel preparation instruction communication and unmet patient educational needs contribute to suboptimal bowel preparation. Educational interventions should address both practice and patient-related factors

    Readability of Prostate Cancer Information Online: A Cross-Sectional Study

    Full text link
    Reading and understanding health information, both components of health literacy, can influence patient decisions related to disease management. Older adults, the population of males at greatest risk for prostate cancer, may have compromised capacity to understand and use health information. The purpose of this study was to determine the readability of prostate cancer materials on the Internet using five recommended readability tests. Using a cleared Internet browser, a search was conducted for “prostate cancer.” The URLs of the first 100 websites in English were recorded to create the sample. The readability scores for each website were determined using an online, recommended service. This service generates five commonly recommended readability tests. All five tests revealed that the majority of websites had difficult readability. There were no significant differences identified between websites with .org, .gov, or .edu extension versus those with .com, .net, or other extension. It is apparent that the Internet is used often as a resource for health-related information. This study demonstrates that the large majority of information available on the Internet about prostate cancer will not be readable for many individuals

    Assessing bowel preparation quality using the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The quality of the bowel preparation directly influences colonoscopy effectiveness. Quality indicators are widely employed to monitor operator performance and to gauge colonoscopy effectiveness. Some have suggested that the enumeration of the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (MNA) may be a more useful measure of bowel preparation quality, but evidence of the utility of this metric is limited. The relationship between bowel preparation quality and MNA was assessed. Methods: Records of adult patients, aged 50–74 years, who had undergone a screening colonoscopy in a 6 month period at a hospital-based endoscopy suite in New York City were examined. Excluded were those who were symptomatic or having a colonoscopy for surveillance. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical findings were abstracted from the endoscopy database. Bowel preparation quality was recorded as excellent, good, fair and poor. Histology and size of polyps removed were gathered from pathology reports. MNA was calculated and incident rate ratios assessing the relationship between bowel preparation quality, MNA, and covariates was calculated using Poisson regression. Results: A total of 2422 colonoscopies were identified; 815 (33.6%) were screening colonoscopies among average risk individuals, 50–74 years; 203 (24.9%) had ≥1 adenomas; and 666 (81.7%) had excellent/good preparation quality. Overall MNA was 0.34 [standard deviation (SD) 0.68] and MNA was greater among those >60 years [incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48–2.42), males (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.26–2.04) and those with good bowel preparation (IRR 2.54, 95%CI 1.04–6.16). Among those with ≥1 adenomas, MNA was 1.48 (SD 1.05) for excellent and 1.00 (SD 0.00) for poor quality preparation (p = 0.55). Conclusions: We found that MNA is sensitive to changes in bowel preparation with higher MNA among those with good bowel preparation compared with those with poor preparation. Our evidence suggests MNA was particularly sensitive when restricted to only those in whom adenomas were seen
    corecore