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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |