Skip to content

Trying to improve the compliance to colorectal cancer screening: type of test provider (GP versus hospital) and type of faecal occult blood test (Guaiac versus immunochemical)

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN83029072
Enrollment
7320
Registered
2005-09-09
Start date
2002-10-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2015-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Colorectal cancer Cancer Colorectal cancer

Interventions

Faecal occult blood test: Two types of test: guaiac versus immunochemical Two types of provider: General Practitioner versus Hospital gastroenterology centre

Sponsors

Agency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Italy (Agenzia di Sanita Pubblica della Regione Lazio)
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: We selected 13 hospitals, out of 20 to participate in the screening programme, in order to represent all types of gastroenterology units (5 university hospitals, 2 large research hospitals, 6 local hospitals) and all geographic areas (7 in the metropolitan area of Rome, 2 in the outskirts of Rome, 4 in towns and small cities of the province). We included in a survey about screening attitudes all the GPs with an office in the 13 selected hospital districts. During the survey, all the GPs were asked to participate in a trial to evaluate the best strategies to enhance the compliance to CRCS. The conditions for eligibility of the GPs were: more than 100 people aged 50?74 in the practice population; a personal computer in the office; and consent to participate. For each of the 13 districts we sampled 10 eligible GPs. The sampled GPs, primary sampling units, were randomised as follows: for each district, five to the immunochemical test and five to the Guaiac test. We sampled 2/10 of the target practice population for each GP; 1/10 of the population was randomised to the GP arm and 1/10 to the hospital arm.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: We analysed the lists of randomised patients: the second member of a pair with the same telephone number was rejected and substituted, if assigned to a different arm.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Compliance to screening: (number of returned faeces samples)/(total number of invited subjects)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Positivity rate; variability of the positivity rate; rate of inadequate samples; positive predictive value.

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026