Validación al castellano del cuestionario Rawl de cribado de cáncer colorrectal con sangre oculta en heces / Rawl's questionnaire spanish validation for colorectal cancer screening with faecal occult blood testing

Introducción: La supervivencia del cáncer colorrectal es del 57% a los 5 años, en parte debido a un diagnóstico tardío por una baja participación en los programas de cribado. Son necesarios instrumentos que analicen las causas de participación.Objetivo: Comprobar la validez y consistencia interna de la versión en castellano del cuestionario de Rawl para el cribado de cáncer colorrectal con sangre oculta en heces.Tipo de estudio: Metodología de validación de cuestionarios.Localización: Tres centros de salud de Valencia.Variables: Edad, sexo, estado civil, nivel de estudios, clase social, consumo de tabaco, alcohol, índice de masa corporal, antecedentes personales y familiares de cáncer.Resultados: Se estudiaron 408 individuos (237 casos y 171 controles). La edad media fue de 59,45 (DE 5,17) años. La consistencia interna de todas las variables alcanzó una alfa de Cronbach de 0,796. El alfa de Cronbach de la dimensión beneficios del cribado fue de de 0,871 y para la dimensión barreras al cribado fue de 0,817. Los coeficientes de correlación intraclase del test-retest para la dimensión de los beneficios del cribado fue de 0,809 (IC 95% 0,606-0,913) y de 0,499 (IC 95% 0,126-0,750) para las barreras.Conclusión: La versión en castellano del cuestionario Rawl es válido, fiable y reproducible. Con lo que disponemos de un elemento validado en España con el que objetivar barreras y beneficios percibidos en un programa de cribado poblacional.

Introduction: Colorectal cancer 5-years-survival is 57%, partway due to a low rate of participation in screening programmes. Instruments analyzing causes of low adherence are needed.Objective: To evaluate the validity and internal consistency of the Spanish version of Rawl's Questionnaire for the screening of colorectal cancer by faecal occult blood testing.Type of study: Questionnaire validation methodology.Location: Three Primary Care Centres in Valencia.Variables: Age, sex, civil status, educational level, social class, smoking, alcohol consumption, body mass index, personal and family history of cancer.Results: We analyzed 408 individuals (237 cases and 171 controls). Mean age was 59.45 years (SD 5.17). Internal consistency of all variables reached a Cronbach's alfa of 0.796. The Cronbach's alfa benefit dimension of the screening was 0.871 and for the barrier dimension of the screening it was 0.817. Intraclass correlation coefficients of the test-retest for the benefit dimension of the screening was 0.809 (CI 95% 0.606-0.913) and 0.499 (CI 95% 0.126-0.750) for the barrier dimension.Conclusion: The Spanish version of Rawl's Questionnaire is valid, reliable and reproducible, so we have this validated instrument with which to identify barriers and benefits in a colorectal screening programme in Spain.

Rawl's questionnaire spanish validation for colorectal cancer screening with faecal occult blood testing. / Validación al castellano del cuestionario Rawl de cribado de cáncer colorrectal con sangre oculta en heces.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer 5-years-survival is 57%, partway due to a low rate of participation in screening programmes. Instruments analyzing causes of low adherence are needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity and internal consistency of the Spanish version of Rawl's Questionnaire for the screening of colorectal cancer by faecal occult blood testing. TYPE OF STUDY: Questionnaire validation methodology. LOCATION: Three Primary Care Centres in Valencia. VARIABLES: Age, sex, civil status, educational level, social class, smoking, alcohol consumption, body mass index, personal and family history of cancer. RESULTS: We analyzed 408 individuals (237 cases and 171 controls). Mean age was 59.45 years (SD 5.17). Internal consistency of all variables reached a Cronbach's alfa of 0.796. The Cronbach's alfa benefit dimension of the screening was 0.871 and for the barrier dimension of the screening it was 0.817. Intraclass correlation coefficients of the test-retest for the benefit dimension of the screening was 0.809 (CI 95% 0.606-0.913) and 0.499 (CI 95% 0.126-0.750) for the barrier dimension. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of Rawl's Questionnaire is valid, reliable and reproducible, so we have this validated instrument with which to identify barriers and benefits in a colorectal screening programme in Spain.

Guía de práctica clínica. Diagnóstico y prevención del cáncer colorrectal. Actualización 2018 / Clinical practice guideline. Diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer. 2018 Update

Este documento actualiza las recomendaciones realizadas por la Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria y la Asociación Española de Gastroenterología para el diagnóstico y la prevención del cáncer colorrectal (CCR). Para establecer la calidad de la evidencia y los niveles de recomendación de las intervenciones se ha utilizado la metodología basada en el sistema GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Este documento establece intervalos de demora óptimos en función de los síntomas y el test de SOH inmunológico (SOHi) y recomienda reducir las barreras para la confirmación diagnóstica en los pacientes con síntomas. En cuanto al cribado en población de riesgo medio, se proponen estrategias para conseguir la implantación universal del cribado poblacional basado en SOHi bienal e incrementar la participación de la población diana, incluyendo la implicación de atención primaria. Esta guía de práctica clínica recomienda el cribado universal del síndrome de Lynch mediante la inmunohistoquímica de las proteínas reparadoras o la inestabilidad de microsatélites en los CCR incidentes y el uso de paneles de genes en los pacientes con poliposis adenomatosas. También actualiza las estrategias para reducir la incidencia y la mortalidad tanto de CCR como de otros tumores asociados a los síndromes hereditarios. En cuanto al CCR familiar no hereditario y la vigilancia tras resección de CCR, adenomas y lesiones serradas, se establecen recomendaciones en función del riesgo atribuible y la reducción del riesgo de la intervención propuesta. Finalmente, en el documento se incluyen recomendaciones respecto a los intervalos de vigilancia en la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y la actitud ante la displasia

This document updates the recommendations made by the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine and the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology for the diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). In order to evaluate the quality of the evidence and determine the recommendation levels of the interventions, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This document establishes optimal delay intervals based on symptoms and the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and recommends reducing the barriers for diagnostic confirmation in symptomatic subjects. With regard to CRC screening in the average-risk population, we propose strategies to achieve the universal implementation of organised CRC screening programmes based on biennial FIT and to increase the participation of the target population, including the involvement of Primary Healthcare. This Clinical Practice Guideline recommends universal screening for Lynch syndrome with mismatch repair proteins immunohistochemistry or microsatellite instability in incident CRCs and the use of gene panels in patients with adenomatous polyposis. It also updates the strategies to reduce the incidence and mortality of both CRC and other tumours associated with hereditary syndromes. Regarding non-hereditary familial CRC and surveillance after resection of adenomas, serrated lesions or CRC, we established the recommendations based on the attributable risk and the risk reduction of the proposed intervention. Finally, the document includes recommendations regarding surveillance intervals in inflammatory bowel disease and the attitude towards dysplasia

Clinical practice guideline. Diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer. 2018 Update. / Guía de práctica clínica. Diagnóstico y prevención del cáncer colorrectal. Actualización 2018.

This document updates the recommendations made by the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine and the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology for the diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). In order to evaluate the quality of the evidence and determine the recommendation levels of the interventions, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This document establishes optimal delay intervals based on symptoms and the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and recommends reducing the barriers for diagnostic confirmation in symptomatic subjects. With regard to CRC screening in the average-risk population, we propose strategies to achieve the universal implementation of organised CRC screening programmes based on biennial FIT and to increase the participation of the target population, including the involvement of Primary Healthcare. This Clinical Practice Guideline recommends universal screening for Lynch syndrome with mismatch repair proteins immunohistochemistry or microsatellite instability in incident CRCs and the use of gene panels in patients with adenomatous polyposis. It also updates the strategies to reduce the incidence and mortality of both CRC and other tumours associated with hereditary syndromes. Regarding non-hereditary familial CRC and surveillance after resection of adenomas, serrated lesions or CRC, we established the recommendations based on the attributable risk and the risk reduction of the proposed intervention. Finally, the document includes recommendations regarding surveillance intervals in inflammatory bowel disease and the attitude towards dysplasia.

Guía de práctica clínica. Diagnóstico y prevención del cáncer colorrectal. Actualización 2018 / Clinical practice guideline. Diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer. 2018 Update

[{"text": "Este documento actualiza las recomendaciones realizadas por la Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria y la Asociación Española de Gastroenterología para el diagnóstico y la prevención del cáncer colorrectal (CCR). Para establecer la calidad de la evidencia y los niveles de recomendación de las intervenciones se ha utilizado la metodología basada en el sistema GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Este documento establece intervalos de demora óptimos en función de los síntomas y el test de SOH inmunológico (SOHi) y recomienda reducir las barreras para la confirmación diagnóstica en los pacientes con síntomas. En cuanto al cribado en población de riesgo medio, se proponen estrategias para conseguir la implantación universal del cribado poblacional basado en SOHi bienal e incrementar la participación de la población diana, incluyendo la implicación de atención primaria. Esta guía de práctica clínica recomienda el cribado universal del síndrome de Lynch mediante la inmunohistoquímica de las proteínas reparadoras o la inestabilidad de microsatélites en los CCR incidentes y el uso de paneles de genes en los pacientes con poliposis adenomatosas. También actualiza las estrategias para reducir la incidencia y la mortalidad tanto de CCR como de otros tumores asociados a los síndromes hereditarios. En cuanto al CCR familiar no hereditario y la vigilancia tras resección de CCR, adenomas y lesiones serradas, se establecen recomendaciones en función del riesgo atribuible y la reducción del riesgo de la intervención propuesta. Finalmente, en el documento se incluyen recomendaciones respecto a los intervalos de vigilancia en la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y la actitud ante la displasia.", "_i": "es"}, {"text": "This document updates the recommendations made by the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine and the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology for the diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). In order to evaluate the quality of the evidence and determine the recommendation levels of the interventions, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This document establishes optimal delay intervals based on symptoms and the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and recommends reducing the barriers for diagnostic confirmation in symptomatic subjects. With regard to CRC screening in the average-risk population, we propose strategies to achieve the universal implementation of organised CRC screening programmes based on biennial FIT and to increase the participation of the target population, including the involvement of Primary Healthcare. This Clinical Practice Guideline recommends universal screening for Lynch syndrome with mismatch repair proteins immunohistochemistry or microsatellite instability in incident CRCs and the use of gene panels in patients with adenomatous polyposis. It also updates the strategies to reduce the incidence and mortality of both CRC and other tumours associated with hereditary syndromes. Regarding non-hereditary familial CRC and surveillance after resection of adenomas, serrated lesions or CRC, we established the recommendations based on the attributable risk and the risk reduction of the proposed intervention. Finally, the document includes recommendations regarding surveillance intervals in inflammatory bowel disease and the attitude towards dysplasia.", "_i": "en"}]

Evaluación de la implantación de las indicaciones y niveles de prioridad del Servizo Galego de Saude para la colonoscopia en pacientes sintomáticos: estudio prospectivo y transversal / Evaluation of the implementation of Galician Health Service indications and priority levels for colonoscopy in symptomatic patients: prospective, cross-sectional study

Introducción: el Servizo Galego de Saúde estableció indicaciones y niveles de prioridad de la colonoscopia (I-vía rápida, II-preferente, III-normal) acorde al riesgo de detectar cáncer colorrectal y lesiones colónicas significativas con acceso desde atención primaria. Nuestro objetivo es analizar los resultados de la implantación. Métodos: estudio prospectivo transversal y observacional. Se incluyeron las colonoscopias solicitadas entre julio y octubre de 2012 en pacientes sintomáticos. Se recogió el nivel asistencial solicitante (especializada o primaria), nivel de prioridad, adecuación a los criterios establecidos, tiempos de demora (solicitud y consulta inicial) y rendimiento diagnóstico para cáncer colorrectal y/o lesión colónica significativa. Se compararon los niveles asistenciales en las prioridades I y II. Resultados: se incluyeron 425 colonoscopias (I = 221, II = 141, III = 63) con una adecuación al protocolo del 67.5 %. Los niveles de prioridad se relacionaron significativamente con los tiempos de demora (días) desde la solicitud (I = 8,7 ± 8,9, II = 50 ± 20,3, III = 80,2 ± 32,2; p < 0,001) y la consulta inicial (I = 32,2 ± 38, II = 74,5 ± 44,2, III = 128,5 ± 47,4; p > 0,001); y con la tasa detección de cáncer colorrectal (I = 20,1 %, II = 19,1 %, III = 4,8 %; p < 0,001) y lesión colónica significativa (I = 35,3 %, II = 34 %, III = 19 %; p = 0,002). En las colonoscopias solicitadas con prioridad I y II desde primaria (21,8 %), la demora desde la consulta inicial fue inferior (primaria = 29,3 ± 26, especializada = 55,2 ± 48,6; p < 0,001) y se detectó más cáncer colorrectal (OR 2,41, IC 95 % 1,31-4,42) y lesión colónica significativa (OR 1,88, IC 95 % 1,13-3,15). Conclusiones: los niveles de prioridad se asocian significativamente con la detección de cáncer colorrectal y lesión colónica significativa. El acceso a la colonoscopia desde primaria reduce los tiempos de demora e incrementa el rendimiento diagnóstico (AU)

Background: the Galician Health Service established indications and priority levels (I = fast track, II = preferential, III = normal) for colonoscopy, according to the risk of colorectal cancer and significant colonic lesions detection with access from primary health care. Our aim is to show the results of the implementation. Methods: we included colonoscopies requested in symptomatic patients from June to October 2012 in a prospective observational cross sectional study. We collected health care level (primary, secondary),priority, appropriateness to the established criteria, wait times (from colonoscopy application and initial consultation) and diagnostic yield for colorectal cancer and/or significant colonic lesion. We compared health care levels in priorities I and II. Results: 425 colonoscopies were included (I = 221, II = 141, III = 63). The appropriateness rate to the protocol was 67.5 %. Priority levels were significantly associated to wait times (days) from application (I = 8.7 ± 8.9, II = 50 ± 20.3, III = 80.2 ± 32.2; p <0.001) and initial consultation (I = 32.2 ± 38, II = 74.5 ± 44.2, III = 128.5 ± 47.4; p < 0.001), and with colorectal cancer (I = 20.1 %, II = 19.1 %, III = 4.8 %, p < 0.001) and significant colonic lesion (I = 35.3 %, II = 34 %, III = 19 %, p = 0.002) detection rates. In priority I and II, 21.8 % of colonoscopies were requested from primary health care. Referral form primary health care reduced wait times from initial consultation to colonoscopy (primary = 29.3 ± 26, secondary = 55.2 ± 48.6, p < 0.001). Instead, colorectal cancer (OR 2.41, 95 % CI 1.31-4.42) and significant colonic lesion (OR 1.88, 95 % CI 1.13-3.15) detection rate was increased. Conclusions: Galician Health Service priority levels are significantly associated with colorectal cancer and significant colonic lesion detection. Referrals to colonoscopy from primary health care reduce waiting times and increase diagnostic yield (AU)

Evaluation of the implementation of Galician Health Service indications and priority levels for colonoscopy in symptomatic patients: prospective, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: the Galician Health Service established indications and priority levels (I = fast track, II = preferential, III = normal) for colonoscopy, according to the risk of colorectal cancer and significant colonic lesions detection with access from primary health care. Our aim is to show the results of the implementation. METHODS: we included colonoscopies requested in symptomatic patients from June to October 2012 in a prospective observational cross sectional study. We collected health care level (primary, secondary), priority, appropriateness to the established criteria, wait times (from colonoscopy application and initial consultation) and diagnostic yield for colorectal cancer and/or significant colonic lesion. We compared health care levels in priorities I and II. RESULTS: 425 colonoscopies were included (I = 221, II = 141, III = 63). The appropriateness rate to the protocol was 67.5 %. Priority levels were significantly associated to wait times (days) from application (I = 8.7 ± 8.9, II = 50 + or - 20.3, III = 80.2 + or - 32.2; p < 0.001) and initial consultation (I = 32.2 + or - 38, II = 74.5 + or - 44.2, III = 128.5 + or - 47.4; p < 0.001), and with colorectal cancer (I = 20.1 %, II = 19.1 %, III = 4.8 %, p < 0.001) and significant colonic lesion (I = 35.3 %, II = 34 %, III = 19 %, p = 0.002) detection rates. In priority I and II, 21.8 % of colonoscopies were requested from primary health care. Referral form primary health care reduced wait times from initial consultation to colonoscopy (primary = 29.3 + or - 26, secondary = 55.2 + or - 48.6, p < 0.001). Instead, colorectal cancer (OR 2.41, 95 % CI 1.31-4.42) and significant colonic lesion (OR 1.88, 95 % CI 1.13- 3.15) detection rate was increased. CONCLUSIONS: Galician Health Service priority levels are significantly associated with colorectal cancer and significant colonic lesion detection. Referrals to colonoscopy from primary health care reduce waiting times and increase diagnostic yield.

Modifiable endoscopic factors that influence the adenoma detection rate in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) has become the most important quality indicator for colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate which modifiable factors, directly related to the endoscopic procedure, influenced the ADR in screening colonoscopies. DESIGN: Observational, nested study. SETTING: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trials. PATIENTS: Asymptomatic people aged 50 to 69 years were eligible for a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial designed to compare colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal cancer screening. A total of 4539 individuals undergoing a direct screening colonoscopy were included in this study. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Bowel cleansing, sedation, withdrawal time in normal colonoscopies, and cecal intubation were analyzed as possible predictors of adenoma detection by using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for age and sex, factors independently related to the ADR were a mean withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI, 1.17-1.96) in normal colonoscopies and split preparation (OR 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). For advanced adenomas, only withdrawal time maintained statistical significance in the multivariate analysis. For proximal adenomas, withdrawal time and cecal intubation maintained independent statistical significance, whereas only withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes and a <10-hour period between the end of preparation and colonoscopy showed independent associations for distal adenomas. LIMITATIONS: Only endoscopic variables have been analyzed. CONCLUSION: Withdrawal time was the only modifiable factor related to the ADR in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies associated with an increased detection rate of overall, advanced, proximal, and distal adenomas.