IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0082676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adherence to Physician Recommendations for Surveillance in Opportunistic Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Necessity of Organized Surveillance

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Stock
  • Bernd Holleczek
  • Michael Hoffmeister
  • Thomas Stolz
  • Christa Stegmaier
  • Hermann Brenner

Abstract

Background: Limited evidence exists on the utilization of surveillance colonoscopy in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. We assessed adherence to physician recommendations for surveillance in opportunistic CRC screening in Germany. Methods: A follow-up study of screening colonoscopy participants in 2007-2009 in Saarland, Germany, was conducted using health insurance claims data. Utilization of additional colonoscopies through to 2011 was ascertained. Adherence to surveillance intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 36 months, defined as having had colonoscopy at 2.5 to 4, 5 to 8, 10.5 to 16 and 33 to 48 months, respectively (i.e., tolerating a delay of 33% of each interval) was assessed. Potential predictors of non-adherence were investigated using logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 20,058 screening colonoscopy participants were included in the study. Of those with recommended surveillance intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 36 months, 46.5% (95%-confidence interval [CI]: 37.3-55.7%), 38.5% (95%-CI: 29.6-47.3%), 25.4% (95%-CI: 21.2-29.6%) and 28.0% (95%-CI: 25.5-30.5%), respectively, had a subsequent colonoscopy within the specified margins. Old age, longer recommended surveillance interval, not having had polypectomy at screening and negative colonoscopy were statistically significant predictors of non-adherence. Conclusion: This study suggests frequent non-adherence to physician recommendations for surveillance colonoscopy in community practice. Increased efforts to improve adherence, including introduction of more elements of an organized screening program, seem necessary to assure a high-quality CRC screening process.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Stock & Bernd Holleczek & Michael Hoffmeister & Thomas Stolz & Christa Stegmaier & Hermann Brenner, 2013. "Adherence to Physician Recommendations for Surveillance in Opportunistic Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Necessity of Organized Surveillance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-1, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0082676
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082676
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082676&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0082676?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0082676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.