CT colonography: a survey of general practitioners' knowledge and interest.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To verify the knowledge and interest of general practitioners on computed tomography colonography (CTC).
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
In 2014, a Web-based questionnaire was proposed to all general practitioners of [Milan, Italy]. The questionnaire consisted of ten questions concerning general practitioners' knowledge about CTC, including application of guidelines in clinical scenarios and diagnostic performance.
RESULTS
Out of 1,053 general practitioners, 231 (22%), 155 men and 76 women (mean age 58 years), completed the survey. We found a significant difference between the age of responders and that of non-responders (p = 0.0033). Of the 231 responders, 84% were aware of the possibility of using CTC as a method for examining the colon-rectum. However, only 57% were aware about low X-ray exposure delivered by CTC and about the possibility of using a reduced cleansing protocol. Only 48% were aware that CTC accuracy in diagnosing 10-mm or larger polyps and colorectal cancers was similar to that of conventional colonoscopy, while 62% were informed about CTC advantages in comparison with double-contrast barium enema; 59% thought that CTC had a potential role as a screening test; 85-86% suggested CTC in the case of refused or incomplete conventional colonoscopy; 79% suggested immediate conventional colonoscopy in the case of at least one 10-mm polyp. About 54% usually prescribe one CTC every 4-6 months, while 36% never have, 3% one CTC per month, and 7% one every 2-3 months. Ninety-four per cent declared that they were willing to attend a course on CTC.
CONCLUSION
General practitioners have limited knowledge concerning CTC. Radiological societies should fill this gap offering dedicated educational initiatives.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.