Invitation letter with a standardized form is a reliable tool to exclude increased risk patients from organized fecal immunological testing-based colorectal cancer screening program.

In Europe, screening guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC) recommend colonoscopy for high-risk patients and fecal immunological testing (FIT) for the standard-risk group. Currently, there is not any validated screening tool to exclude high-risk patients. The aim of the study is to evaluate the validity of exclusion and evaluate the follow-up of patients identified as increased risk for CRC. In this retrospective study using a prospective database, patients at increased risk were identified using the standardized form and then excluded from the FIT screening invitation. A specific questionnaire was sent to all patients at increased risk in order to confirm the reason for the exclusion and evaluate their follow-up. Among 220 695 eligible individuals, 16 693 (7.5%) were excluded after being characterized at increased risk using the standardized form. The questionnaire was sent to these 16.693 excluded patients and completed by 5076 (30.7%) patients. Validity of exclusion was confirmed in 92% of cases. Endoscopic follow-up was in agreement with guideline in 89% of persons at increased risk (inflammatory bowel disease 93%, personal history of CCR 92%, of colonic polyps 82%, family history of CRC 77%). This study suggests that the standardized form is a reliable tool to correctly exclude from the screening program 92% of patients at increased risk for CRC.

[Inappropriateness of hospital days and causes of failure in a Gastroenterology and Internal Medicine ward]. / Etude de la pertinence des journées d'hospitalisation dans un service de Gastroentérologie et Médecine Interne et analyse des causes de non-pertinence.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse patients' features linked to hospital inappropriateness and to highlight causes of inappropriate days in a Gastroenterology and Internal Medicine ward of a teaching hospital. METHODS: Appropriateness of patients' hospital days (2 months activity) was assessed using the French version of criteria of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol. Reasons of inappropriate hospital days were identified through a questionnaire based on patients' need. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty patients were studied. Among the 2151 hospital days assessed, 880 (41%) were inappropriate. Two different groups of inappropriate stays were brought up. In the first group, the inappropriate period duration was short (<=5 days) and patients were not different from those of the appropriate group. In the second group, the inappropriate period duration was long ( > 5 days) and 710 days (33%) were inappropriate. Patients were elderly, lived alone and their disease did not concern the gastrointestinal tract. During inappropriate days, they expected access to less technical facilities than the short stay medical ward. CONCLUSION: The socio-demographic and medical features of the patients from the long duration inappropriateness group should help to limit inappropriate hospital days: a significant economic and organizational stake for patients, hospital and public interest.