Cargando…

Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort

BACKGROUND: For certain laboratory investigations it is necessary to obtain native stool samples and process them within a narrow time window at the point of contact or a nearby laboratory. However, it is not known whether it is feasible to obtain stool samples from asymptomatic individuals during a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schultze, A., Akmatov, M.K., Andrzejak, M., Karras, N., Kemmling, Y., Maulhardt, A., Wieghold, S., Ahrens, W., Günther, K., Schlenz, H., Krause, G., Pessler, F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25293889
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-014-2051-z
_version_ 1782341434009976832
author Schultze, A.
Akmatov, M.K.
Andrzejak, M.
Karras, N.
Kemmling, Y.
Maulhardt, A.
Wieghold, S.
Ahrens, W.
Günther, K.
Schlenz, H.
Krause, G.
Pessler, F.
author_facet Schultze, A.
Akmatov, M.K.
Andrzejak, M.
Karras, N.
Kemmling, Y.
Maulhardt, A.
Wieghold, S.
Ahrens, W.
Günther, K.
Schlenz, H.
Krause, G.
Pessler, F.
author_sort Schultze, A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: For certain laboratory investigations it is necessary to obtain native stool samples and process them within a narrow time window at the point of contact or a nearby laboratory. However, it is not known whether it is feasible to obtain stool samples from asymptomatic individuals during an appointment in a study center (SC). We therefore compared participants’ preference, feasibility and acceptance of stool sample collection during the appointment at the study center (on-site sampling) to collection at home after the appointment. METHODS: The study was conducted at two sites in Northern Germany (Bremen, n = 156; Hannover, n = 147) during the Pretest 2 phase of the German National Cohort (GNC), drawing upon a randomly selected population supplemented by a small convenience sample. In the study center, the participants were given the choice to provide a stool sample during the appointment or to collect a sample later at home and return it by mail. RESULTS: In all, 303 of the 351 participants (86 %) of Pretest 2 at these sites participated in this feasibility study. Only 7.9 % (24/303) of the participants chose on-site collection, whereas 92 % (279/303) chose at-home collection. There were significant differences between the two study sites in that 14 % (21/147) of participants in Hannover and 2 % (3/156) of participants in Bremen chose on-site collection. Compliance was high in both groups, as 100 % (24/24) and 98 % (272/279) of participants in the on-site and at-home groups, respectively, provided complete samples. Both methods were highly accepted, as 92 % of the participants in each group (22/24 and 227/248) stated that stool collection at the respective site was acceptable. CONCLUSION: When given a choice, most participants in this population-based study preferred home collection of stool samples to collection in the study center. Thus, native stool samples for immediate processing in the study center may potentially be obtained only from a subpopulation of participants, which may lead to selection bias. Home collection, on the other hand, proved to be a highly feasible method for studies that do not require freshly collected native stool.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4210724
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42107242014-10-31 Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort Schultze, A. Akmatov, M.K. Andrzejak, M. Karras, N. Kemmling, Y. Maulhardt, A. Wieghold, S. Ahrens, W. Günther, K. Schlenz, H. Krause, G. Pessler, F. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Leitthema • Main topic BACKGROUND: For certain laboratory investigations it is necessary to obtain native stool samples and process them within a narrow time window at the point of contact or a nearby laboratory. However, it is not known whether it is feasible to obtain stool samples from asymptomatic individuals during an appointment in a study center (SC). We therefore compared participants’ preference, feasibility and acceptance of stool sample collection during the appointment at the study center (on-site sampling) to collection at home after the appointment. METHODS: The study was conducted at two sites in Northern Germany (Bremen, n = 156; Hannover, n = 147) during the Pretest 2 phase of the German National Cohort (GNC), drawing upon a randomly selected population supplemented by a small convenience sample. In the study center, the participants were given the choice to provide a stool sample during the appointment or to collect a sample later at home and return it by mail. RESULTS: In all, 303 of the 351 participants (86 %) of Pretest 2 at these sites participated in this feasibility study. Only 7.9 % (24/303) of the participants chose on-site collection, whereas 92 % (279/303) chose at-home collection. There were significant differences between the two study sites in that 14 % (21/147) of participants in Hannover and 2 % (3/156) of participants in Bremen chose on-site collection. Compliance was high in both groups, as 100 % (24/24) and 98 % (272/279) of participants in the on-site and at-home groups, respectively, provided complete samples. Both methods were highly accepted, as 92 % of the participants in each group (22/24 and 227/248) stated that stool collection at the respective site was acceptable. CONCLUSION: When given a choice, most participants in this population-based study preferred home collection of stool samples to collection in the study center. Thus, native stool samples for immediate processing in the study center may potentially be obtained only from a subpopulation of participants, which may lead to selection bias. Home collection, on the other hand, proved to be a highly feasible method for studies that do not require freshly collected native stool. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2014-10-08 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4210724/ /pubmed/25293889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-014-2051-z Text en © The Author(s) 2014 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Leitthema • Main topic
Schultze, A.
Akmatov, M.K.
Andrzejak, M.
Karras, N.
Kemmling, Y.
Maulhardt, A.
Wieghold, S.
Ahrens, W.
Günther, K.
Schlenz, H.
Krause, G.
Pessler, F.
Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title_full Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title_fullStr Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title_short Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: Feasibility and participants’ preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort
title_sort comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study: feasibility and participants’ preference in pretest 2 of the german national cohort
topic Leitthema • Main topic
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25293889
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-014-2051-z
work_keys_str_mv AT schultzea comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT akmatovmk comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT andrzejakm comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT karrasn comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT kemmlingy comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT maulhardta comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT wiegholds comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT ahrensw comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT guntherk comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT schlenzh comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT krauseg comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort
AT pesslerf comparisonofstoolcollectiononsiteversusathomeinapopulationbasedstudyfeasibilityandparticipantspreferenceinpretest2ofthegermannationalcohort