Download Your FREE Special Report Today!
Simply Complete the Form Below
Fecal Occult Blood Tests (FOBT) are a standard, bread-and-butter test for clinical laboratories and physician offices. However, the traditional chemical-based FOBT has a known high rate of false negatives and very poor patient compliance due to patient preparation demands: a special diet for several days prior to the test, for instance. A new general of fecal occult blood laboratory tests utilizing immunochemistry demonstrates higher sensitivity, fewer false negatives, and greater patient compliance, which can lead to better laboratory efficiency and cost savings.
This White Paper addresses the issues that healthcare providers encounter when choosing screening tests for colorectal cancer. This report, “Cleaning Up Your Medical Laboratory’s FOB Testing Program: New Opportunities for Better Patient Compliance, Increased Accuracy, and a Happier Staff,” describes how the next generation technology for an immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) compares favorably to traditional testing. Using monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies to detect only human blood in stool, this technology has improved specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, as shown in this Free White Paper.
The White Paper discusses the two types of FOBT that are currently available. One is a chemical-based fecal occult blood test (CFOBT) that uses the chemical guaiac to detect heme (the iron component in hemoglobin) in the patient’s stool. The other type is called immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT), and it uses antibodies to detect human hemoglobin protein in stool. New iFOBTs have shown to have far fewer false positive results than CFOBTs, as well as far greater sensitivity.
These two types of tests are examined in detail and placed in the context of Medicare reimbursement and the overall FOBT market. The advantages of the iFOBT are compared to the CFOBT as they related to pathologists, physicians, and patients. A case study in the White Paper includes data from the clinical laboratory at Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin, North Dakota. This medical laboratory switched from a traditional guaiac test to the latest technology for iFOBT, and specific economic benefits and laboratory efficiencies were realized by the lab, the hospital, and its patients.
A second case study presented in the White Paper is the experience of the clinical laboratory at Phoenix Indian Medical Center in Phoenix, Arizona. Phoenix Indian Medical Center evaluated different testing methods from multiple vendors before choosing the method pathologists thought would be best for patient care. The result was significantly higher patient compliance, and greater laboratory efficiency leading to significant return on investment.
The Dark Report is happy to offer our readers a chance to download our recently published FREE White Paper “Cleaning Up Your Medical Laboratory’s Fecal Occult Blood Testing Program: New Opportunities for Better Patient Compliance, Increased Accuracy, and a Happier Staff” at absolutely no charge. This free download will provide readers with a detailed explanation on how improve you lab’s FOB testing program.
Among other topics, this FREE White Paper specifically addresses:
- A comparison of false negative results between CFOBT and iFOBT
- An evaluation of the various FOBT platforms’ sensitivity and efficacy
- A cost comparison and discussion of Medicare reimbursement between the two modalities
- Case studies in which laboratories and institutions’ use of iFOBT led to positive financial performance and greater customer returns
For more about FOB Testing improvements, please click here.
Table of Contents
Preface — Page 3
Introduction — Page 4
Chapter 1. FOBT Market Summary— Page 5
Chapter 2. Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer: Traditional Testing Practices— Page 6
Immunoassay Test Opens the Door to Improved Colorectal Cancer Diagnostics — Page 8
Chapter 4. Implications for the Clinical Laboratory — Page 12
Chapter 5. Assessing the Opportunities for Clinical Labs to Add Value — Page 14
Chapter 6. Case Study: Clinical Laboratory at Phoenix Indian Medical Center — Page 16
Chapter 7. Conclusion — Page 19
References — Page 20