ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023
Evaluation of an Innovative Colon Capsule Endoscopy Service in Scotland From the Perspective of Patients: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- PillCam COLON 2 for investigation of the colon through direct visualisation: systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Routine Diagnostic Pathway for Colorectal Diseases (DanCap): Protocol for a Cluster-Allocated Crossover Trial.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patient-centered gastrointestinal function assessment technologies: a paradigm shift from traditional approaches to non-invasive innovations.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Patient experience of colon capsule endoscopy in clinical practice: a structured, comparative patient survey.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient priorities and decision-making process when choosing between colonic investigation alternatives: a qualitative interview study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Factors predicting conversion from colon capsule endoscopy to conventional optical endoscopy-findings from the CESCAIL study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Multicentre Study of 10,369 Symptomatic Patients Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Colon Capsule Endoscopy, Colonoscopy and CT Colonography.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Exploring the feasibility of home-delivered capsule endoscopy with 5G support: innovations and carbon footprint insights.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Patient experiences of colon capsule endoscopy: a qualitative study.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColonoscopy is the gold standard for lower gastrointestinal diagnostics. The procedure is invasive, and its demand is high, resulting in long waiting times. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a procedure that uses a video capsule to investigate the colon, meaning that it can be carried out in a person's own home. This type of "hospital-at-home" service could potentially reduce costs and waiting times, and increase patient satisfaction. Little is currently understood, however, about how CCE is actually experienced and accepted by patients.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to capture and report patient experiences of the CCE technology (the capsule and associated belt and recorder) and of the new clinical pathway for the CCE service being rolled out as part of routine service in Scotland.
methodsThis was a mixed methods service evaluation of patient experiences of a real-world, deployed, managed service for CCE in Scotland. Two hundred and nine patients provided feedback via a survey about their experiences of the CCE service. Eighteen of these patients took part in a further telephone interview to capture more in-depth lived experiences to understand the barriers and opportunities for the further adoption and scaling up of the CCE service in a way that supports the patient experience and journey.
resultsPatients overall perceived the CCE service to be of significant value (eg, mentioning reduced travel times, reduced waiting times, and freedom to complete the procedure at home as perceived benefits). Our findings also highlighted the importance of clear and accessible information (eg, what to expect and how to undertake the bowel preparation) and the need for managing expectations of patients (eg, being clear about when results will be received and what happens if a further colonoscopy is required).
conclusionsThe findings led to recommendations for future implementations of managed CCE services in National Health Service (NHS) Scotland that could also apply more widely (United Kingdom and beyond) and at a greater scale (with more patients in more contexts). These include promoting CCE with, for, and among clinical teams to ensure adoption and success; capturing and understanding reasons why patients do and do not opt for CCE; providing clear information in a variety of appropriate ways to patients (eg, around the importance of bowel preparation instructions); improving the bowel preparation (this is not specific to CCE alone); providing flexible options for issuing and returning the kit (eg, dropping off at a pharmacy); and embedding formative evaluation within the service itself (eg, capturing patient-reported experiences via surveys in the information pack when the equipment is returned).
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.