Patient-reported outcomes and preferences for colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy : A systematic review with meta-analysis
(2021) In Diagnostics 11(9).- Abstract
Colon capsule endoscopy as an alternative to colonoscopy for the diagnosis of colonic disease may serve as a less invasive and more tolerable investigation for patients. Our aim was to examine patient-reported outcomes for colon capsule endoscopy compared to conventional optical colonoscopy including preference of investigation modality, tolerability and adverse events. A systematic literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed and Embase. Search results were thoroughly screened for in-and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent assessment of transparency and completeness, after which, data for meta-analysis were extracted. Pooled estimates of patient preference were calculated and heterogeneity was examined including... (More)
Colon capsule endoscopy as an alternative to colonoscopy for the diagnosis of colonic disease may serve as a less invasive and more tolerable investigation for patients. Our aim was to examine patient-reported outcomes for colon capsule endoscopy compared to conventional optical colonoscopy including preference of investigation modality, tolerability and adverse events. A systematic literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed and Embase. Search results were thoroughly screened for in-and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent assessment of transparency and completeness, after which, data for meta-analysis were extracted. Pooled estimates of patient preference were calculated and heterogeneity was examined including univariate meta-regressions. Patient-reported tolerability and adverse events were reviewed. Out of fourteen included studies, twelve had investigated patient-reported outcomes in patients who had undergone both investigations, whereas in two the patients were randomized between investigations. Pooled patient preferences were estimated to be 52% (CI 95%: 41–63%) for colon capsule endoscopy and 45% (CI 95%: 33–57%) for conventional colonoscopy: not indicating a significant difference. Procedural adverse events were rarely reported by patients for either investigation. The tolerability was high for both colon capsule endoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patient preferences for conventional colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy were not significantly different. Procedural adverse events were rare and the tolerability for colon capsule endoscopy was consistently reported higher or equal to that of conventional colonoscopy.
(Less)
- author
- Deding, Ulrik ; Valdivia, Pablo Cortegoso ; Koulaouzidis, Anastasios LU ; Baatrup, Gunnar ; Toth, Ervin LU ; Spada, Cristiano ; Fernández-Urién, Ignacio ; Pennazio, Marco and Bjørsum-Meyer, Thomas
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021-09
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Colon capsule endoscopy, Colonoscopy, Endoscopy, Patient-reported outcomes
- in
- Diagnostics
- volume
- 11
- issue
- 9
- article number
- 1730
- publisher
- MDPI AG
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85116594175
- pmid:34574071
- ISSN
- 2075-4418
- DOI
- 10.3390/diagnostics11091730
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 2b6386ec-1118-4a5e-bc20-1444ff7f3f87
- date added to LUP
- 2022-03-22 17:04:39
- date last changed
- 2024-06-21 02:45:34
@article{2b6386ec-1118-4a5e-bc20-1444ff7f3f87,
abstract = {{<p>Colon capsule endoscopy as an alternative to colonoscopy for the diagnosis of colonic disease may serve as a less invasive and more tolerable investigation for patients. Our aim was to examine patient-reported outcomes for colon capsule endoscopy compared to conventional optical colonoscopy including preference of investigation modality, tolerability and adverse events. A systematic literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed and Embase. Search results were thoroughly screened for in-and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent assessment of transparency and completeness, after which, data for meta-analysis were extracted. Pooled estimates of patient preference were calculated and heterogeneity was examined including univariate meta-regressions. Patient-reported tolerability and adverse events were reviewed. Out of fourteen included studies, twelve had investigated patient-reported outcomes in patients who had undergone both investigations, whereas in two the patients were randomized between investigations. Pooled patient preferences were estimated to be 52% (CI 95%: 41–63%) for colon capsule endoscopy and 45% (CI 95%: 33–57%) for conventional colonoscopy: not indicating a significant difference. Procedural adverse events were rarely reported by patients for either investigation. The tolerability was high for both colon capsule endoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patient preferences for conventional colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy were not significantly different. Procedural adverse events were rare and the tolerability for colon capsule endoscopy was consistently reported higher or equal to that of conventional colonoscopy.</p>}},
author = {{Deding, Ulrik and Valdivia, Pablo Cortegoso and Koulaouzidis, Anastasios and Baatrup, Gunnar and Toth, Ervin and Spada, Cristiano and Fernández-Urién, Ignacio and Pennazio, Marco and Bjørsum-Meyer, Thomas}},
issn = {{2075-4418}},
keywords = {{Colon capsule endoscopy; Colonoscopy; Endoscopy; Patient-reported outcomes}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{9}},
publisher = {{MDPI AG}},
series = {{Diagnostics}},
title = {{Patient-reported outcomes and preferences for colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy : A systematic review with meta-analysis}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091730}},
doi = {{10.3390/diagnostics11091730}},
volume = {{11}},
year = {{2021}},
}