Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Commentary

Colorectal cancer screening in Canada: Why not consider nurse endoscopists?

Linda Rabeneck and Lawrence F. Paszat
CMAJ August 05, 2003 169 (3) 206-207;
Linda Rabeneck
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lawrence F. Paszat
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In a recent CMAJ commentary, Schabas1 argues that the time has come for colorectal cancer screening in Canada using fecal occult blood (FOB) testing. He points out that, based on the available evidence, 6 Canadian groups have endorsed annual or biennial FOB screening of average-risk, asymptomatic people 50 years of age and older. He also points out that colonoscopy is an option for screening, that it is “probably a better screening tool than FOB testing” but that we do not have the capacity to offer colonoscopy as the initial screening test.

Although we agree that colonoscopy is better than FOB testing in detecting colorectal cancer and share Schabas' concern about the capacity of our health care system to offer colonoscopy as the initial screening test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, endorsed by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care as an alternative to FOB testing,2 offers another approach.

Case–control studies have shown a reduction of 60% to 80% in the rate of death from rectosigmoid cancer using screening sigmoidoscopy, with a protective effect lasting up to 10 years.3 The detection rates of cancer (0.3%) and adenomas (12%) among the 40 674 individuals enrolled in the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial4 exceeded those reported in the initial screening round of a large randomized controlled trial of FOB testing (0.2% and 0.8% respectively).5 Also, the rate of detection of adenomas 1 cm or greater in size in the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial was 4 times higher than the rate with one-time FOB screening. Lieberman and Weiss6 performed colonoscopy in a cohort of 3121 asymptomatic adults aged 50–75 years. Colorectal cancer was detected in 1%, and advanced neoplasms (adenomas 1 cm or larger, villous adenomas and adenomas with high-grade dysplasia) were detected in 9.6%. They estimated that one-time FOB screening would detect 24% of patients with colorectal cancer or advanced neoplasms and that flexible sigmoidoscopy would detect 70%, provided that all individuals with an adenoma in the distal colon undergo colonoscopy. In addition, they estimated that one-time combined screening with FOB testing and sigmoidoscopy would detect 76% of cases of colorectal cancer or advanced neoplasms.

There is strong evidence that trained nurses can perform flexible sigmoidoscopy as safely and effectively as physicians. In one study, 2 registered nurses and 2 licensed practical nurses, trained to do flexible sigmoidoscopy, performed 1881 independent screening examinations of outpatients 45 years or older.7 During the same period, 730 examinations in similar outpatients were performed by 2 gastroenterologists. The mean depth of insertion of the sigmoidoscope was slightly greater (by 2–3 cm) in the patients examined by the physicians, the proportion of examinations that were positive for adenomas or cancer did not differ between the nurse and physician groups, and there were no complications. In another study of flexible sigmoidoscopy in asymptomatic people 50 years and older with no family history of colorectal cancer,8 nurse practitioners and physician assistants detected neoplastic polyps in a greater proportion of patients than did physicians (7.8% v. 5.8%); however, this difference was not significant after adjustment for differences in patient age and sex. No complications occurred. In a subsequent randomized controlled trial, 328 patients were assigned to screening flexible sigmoidoscopy (with a 70-cm instrument) by either a nurse endoscopist or a gastroenterologist.9 The rate of missed adenomatous polyps did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (21% and 20% respectively, p = 0.91), and no complications occurred. The gastroenterologists inserted the sigmoidoscope further than the nurse endoscopists did (61 v. 55 cm, p < 0.001).

What would the advantages be of establishing programs in Canada whereby colorectal cancer screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy would be performed by nurses? Clearly, flexible sigmoidoscopy has rates of detecting cancer and adenomas that compare favourably with those for FOB testing. Flexible sigmoidoscopy is effective and safer than colonoscopy (perforation rate 1 per 10 000 v. 1 per 1000),10 bowel preparation is easier (an enema 2–3 hours before the procedure), and because conscious sedation and patient monitoring are not needed with flexible sigmoidoscopy, the procedure can be readily done in an office setting. Finally, access to the procedure need not be limited in rural areas. In many northern regions of the country, nurse practitioners already play a key role in the delivery of primary care.

A model of screening using flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by a trained nurse has been reported in Ontario.11 During each half-day clinic, the nurse used a video-monitored flexible sigmoidoscope to examine 10 average-risk patients. The videos were later reviewed by a gastroenterologist. About 15% of the patients were referred for subsequent colonoscopy.

In the future, other options will likely be available for colorectal cancer screening, such as CT colonography. Although a few studies have shown this technique to have a sensitivity of at least 90% for polyps 1 cm or greater in size,12 other studies have not.13 The explanation for these mixed results is not yet clear. Although promising and deserving of further study, CT colonography is not ready for use in clinical practice as a colorectal cancer screening test.

The need for population-based colorectal cancer screening programs in Canada is urgent. As an alternative method to FOB screening, let us consider flexible sigmoidoscopy done by nurse endoscopists. It would be effective and could be done safely and efficiently in an office setting. We propose that a national task force examine the feasibility of implementing screening programs with flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by nurse endoscopists. The burden of colorectal cancer in Canada is among the highest in the world. How can we justify further delay?

Footnotes

  • Contributors: Dr. Rabeneck was responsible for drafting the article. Both authors were responsible for the critical revision of the article for intellectual content and for approving the final version.

    Competing interests: None declared.

References

  1. 1.↵
    Schabas RE. Colorectal cancer screening in Canada: It's time to act [editorial]. CMAJ 2003;168(2):178-9.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Colorectal cancer screening. Recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2001;165(2):206-8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP, Weiss NS. A case–control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;326:653-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial Investigators. Single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer: baseline findings of a UK multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1291-300.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996;348:1472-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Lieberman DA, Weiss DG. One-time screening for colorectal cancer with combined fecal occult-blood testing and examination of the distal colon. N Engl J Med 2001;345:555-60.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    Maule WF. Screening for colorectal cancer by nurse endoscopists. N Engl J Med 1994;330:183-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    Wallace MB, Kemp JA, Meyer F, Horton K, Reffel A, Christiansen CL, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer with flexible sigmoidoscopy by nonphysician endoscopists. Am J Med 1999;107:214-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Schoenfeld P, Lipscomb S, Crook J, Dominguez J, Butler J, Holmes L, et al. Accuracy of polyp detection by gastroenterologists and nurse endoscopists during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 1999;117:312-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, Godlee F, Stolar MH, Mulrow CD, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997;112(2):594-642.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Shapero TF, Alexander PE, Hoover J, Burgis E, Schabas R. Colorectal cancer screening: video-reviewed flexible sigmoidoscopy by nurse endoscopists — a Canadian community-based perspective. Can J Gastroenterol 2001;15:441-5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC III, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps [published erratum in N Engl J Med 2000;342(7):524]. N Engl J Med 1999;341(20):1496-503.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    Miao YM, Amin Z, Healy J, Burn P, Murugan N, Westaby D, et al. A prospective single centre study comparing computed tomography pneumocolon against colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal neoplasms. Gut 2000;47(6):832-7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 169 (3)
CMAJ
Vol. 169, Issue 3
5 Aug 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Colorectal cancer screening in Canada: Why not consider nurse endoscopists?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Colorectal cancer screening in Canada: Why not consider nurse endoscopists?
Linda Rabeneck, Lawrence F. Paszat
CMAJ Aug 2003, 169 (3) 206-207;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Colorectal cancer screening in Canada: Why not consider nurse endoscopists?
Linda Rabeneck, Lawrence F. Paszat
CMAJ Aug 2003, 169 (3) 206-207;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Outcomes of 1949 endoscopic procedures: Performed by a Canadian rural family physician
  • Minerva
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Time to dismantle systemic anti-Black racism in medicine in Canada
  • Preventing the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 into school settings
  • How should we move for health? The case for the 24-hour movement paradigm
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Screening & diagnostic tests
    • Nursing
    • Cancer: gastroenterological

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

Powered by HighWire