Z Gastroenterol 2019; 57(05): e146
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1691894
POSTER
Gastroenterologie
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

City or landside area: Do participation rates of quality ensured screening colonoscopy differ?

A Hinterberger
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
D Penz
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
E Kammerlander-Waldmann
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
B Majcher
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
A Asaturi
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
A Szymanska
1   Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH): Quality assurance working group, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
M Trauner
2   Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria, 1090 Wien, Austria
,
M Ferlitsch
2   Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria, 1090 Wien, Austria
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 May 2019 (online)

Also available at
 

Introduction:

To reduce incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC), participation of risk population at screening colonoscopy is essential. Studies show, political and epidemiological factors can minimize participation (Hassan et al, Gastroenterol. 2018). Aim of study was to identify, if participation rates of quality ensured screening colonoscopies differ between patients who live on the country side and those who live in the city.

Methods and Patients:

1.931 areas where 27.242 patients, who underwent quality ensured screening colonoscopy in 2018, got included. Vienna got calculated separately. Data from the Austrian quality certificate of screening colonoscopy got matched with epidemiologic register from Statistic Austria. Population number of 50 – 75 years old people in municipalities got matched with numbers of screened patients. Means of participating patients in rural areas and cities (legally defined) got compared with a two-tailed t-test (significant if p ≤0,05).

Tab. 1

State

City (Mean+SD)

Country side (Mean+SD)

p-value

Burgenland

2,59% (SD = 1,83)

2,78% (SD = 4,36)

p = 0,882

Carinthia

0,98% (SD = 0,84)

0,82% (SD = 0,58)

p = 0,329

Lower Austria

0,97% (SD = 1,26)

0,77% (SD = 0,96)

p = 0.132

Upper Austria

1,88% (SD = 1,19)

1,62% (SD = 2,29)

p = 0,568

Salzburg

1,23% (SD = 0,87)

1,32% (SD = 1,16)

p = 0,817

Styria

1,58% (SD = 1,22)

1,46% (SD = 1,08)

p = 0.505

Tyrol

0,12% (SD = 0,97)

1,13% (SD = 0,11)

p = 0.917

Vorarlberg

0,03% (SD = 0,05)

0,43% (SD = 0,74)

p = 0,285

Results:

25.293 screening colonoscopies in 188 cities, where 2832450 people live and 1742 landside provinces, where 4101041 people live, got analyzed. Results are shown as mean and standard deviation (SD). In Austria 1,34% (SD = 1,32) who live in the city underwent quality ensured screening colonoscopy vs. 1,31% (SD = 1,93) in rural areas (p = 0,820). Vienna had a participation rate of 0,12% (SD = 0,30) and got compared with the participation rate of Austria's cities (p = 0,673). Eight states got analyzed. (Tab. 1)

Conclusion:

Percentage of patients who underwent quality ensured screening colonoscopy did not differ significantly between landside areas and cities (p = 0,820). In Vorarlberg only one physician participates at the Austrian certificate of screening colonoscopy, which causes a low rate.