Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube

Patients’ Difficulties with Five Different Fecal Immunochemical Tests

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Jeanette Daly, RN, PhD; Yinghui, Xu, MS; Barcey T. Levy, PhD, MD

Corresponding Author: Jeanette Daly, RN, PhD; Department of Family Medicine, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa

Email: jeanette-daly@uiowa.edu

DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2023.230469R1

Keywords: Cancer Screening, Colorectal Cancer, Fecal Occult Blood Test, Surveys and Questionnaires

Dates: Submitted: 12-13-2023; Revised: 05-02-2024; Accepted: 05-20-2024

FINAL PUBLICATION: |HTML| |PDF|


BACKGROUND: At least 26 different fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are available for use in the U.S. Liquid vial and card collection devices are available.

OBJECTIVES: 1) assess participant’s difficulties with and preferences for types of FITs; 2) assess whether errors in FIT collection were associated with FIT collection difficulty; 3) identify factors associated with difficulty with FIT stool collection.

METHODS: Prospective individuals scheduled for a colonoscopy were invited to participate in a study comparing test characteristics of five FITs. A product questionnaire asked participants about ease of collection and difficulties.  

RESULTS: 2148 participants; mean age 63 years; 63% females, 83% Whites, and 19% Hispanics. 1,265 (61%) preferred use of a liquid vial vs. 181 (9%) the card. 49% had no difficulty with Hemoccult ICT, and 66-70% had no difficulty with the liquid vials. Difficulties with Hemoccult ICT included: being messy (21%), collection window too small (19%), and getting sample on stick (8%). Difficulties with the liquid vials included difficulty probing or scraping the stool (5 to 8%) and unclear directions (3%). In a multivariable model, the perceived difficulty in FIT collection was significantly higher for Hemoccult ICT compared with OC-Auto Micro(Adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.05), and it was significantly high for those with a FIT error (AOR, 3.90).

CONCLUSION: Participants strongly preferred a liquid vial compared to a card. Perceived difficulty was significantly associated with FIT errors and with FIT brand. Medical offices providing FITs should ensure that patients understand the task of FIT collection, so that errors are minimized.

ABSTRACTS IN PRESS

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire