Factors to Improve Endoscopic Screening for Colorectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer is one of the most sprayed cancers; the gold standard of diagnostic is a colonoscopy. The quality of this examination is depended on many factors, which includes doctors' experience.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to establish the main factors affecting the completeness of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Endoscopists were questioned; descriptive statistics methods and logistic regression were used.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The main factors that influence the quality of screening colonoscopy were identified: experience in colonoscopy, theoretical training, participation in the screening program, and number of annual colonoscopies. The calculated odds ratio for the selected dependent variable is calculated.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience for more than 5 years (p = 0.017) and at least 200 colonoscopies per year (p = 0.004) are the main factors that allow to perform complete colonoscopy in 90% or more of cases.

How important is public health practitioner registration to UK public health employers?

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to understand the extent to which public health practitioner registration is encouraged by UK employers through recruitment, i.e. by including registration as an essential or desirable criterion in job descriptions and person specifications.

STUDY DESIGN

A repeated survey was conducted on two main UK public health job websites.

METHODS

Data were collected via a repeated structured search of all public health practitioner posts advertised in two specified weeks in March and September 2018 on two main UK public health jobs websites: local government jobs and National Health Service (NHS) jobs.

RESULTS

Fifty-six posts were identified for inclusion in the study. Only one post (2% of the total) required UK Public Health Register (UKPHR) registration or working towards registration. It was more common but still a minority (13% or 23%) of posts to require registration with any relevant register (e.g. UKPHR, Nursing and Midwifery Council or Health and Care Professions Council). Most employers demonstrated a desire for flexibility with none requiring an MSc Public Health and a majority requiring any relevant degree or equivalent experience (46% or 82%). Evidence of continuing professional development was also commonly required (34% or 61%).

CONCLUSION

There is currently a mismatch between UK national policy support for public health practitioner registration and the value that registered practitioners place on it and the recruitment polices of many UK public health employers.