ArticleInternational surgery
The effectiveness of a rapid-access flexible sigmoidoscopy clinic in a district hospital.
Article in International surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Historically rapid-access colorectal clinics have had high proportions of nonconforming referrals from primary care physicians, which calls into question the clinics' efficacy. We aim to determine the effectiveness of our rapid-access flexible sigmoidoscopy clinic, and the adherence to the referral guidelines for suspected bowel cancer by general practitioners. We performed a 3-month retrospective audit to evaluate (1) the proportion of patients seen within 2 weeks, (2) the appropriateness of referrals, (3) the proportion of patients with findings, and (4) the proportion of patients who had further tests. A total of 59 patients (19 male, 40 female; age 35-86 years) were included in the study. All were offered an appointment within 2 weeks. Forty-one cases (82%) were appropriate referrals. Twenty-eight patients (47%) had pathology at sigmoidoscopy. Cancer pick-up rate was 6%. Thirty-seven patients (74%) had further investigations. We determined that our rapid-access clinic for symptomatic patients has high diagnostic accuracy and that access to early investigation is being used appropriately by general practitioners. In the current climate of spending cuts and streamlining services, our study confirms we are meeting targets for delivery of our colorectal service. The majority of referrals under the 2-week rule are appropriate. Rapid access to early investigation is being used appropriately by general practitioners contrasting previous studies with high proportions of nonconforming referrals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.