Cargando…
Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials
BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for a high-quality colonoscopy. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated bowel preparation protocols, including split-dose and low-volume regimens. However, RCTs are conducted in an ideal, controlled setting, and translation of tr...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7204808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwy070 |
_version_ | 1783530124188057600 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Chang (Nancy) Yang, Ruobing Hookey, Lawrence |
author_facet | Wang, Chang (Nancy) Yang, Ruobing Hookey, Lawrence |
author_sort | Wang, Chang (Nancy) |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for a high-quality colonoscopy. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated bowel preparation protocols, including split-dose and low-volume regimens. However, RCTs are conducted in an ideal, controlled setting, and translation of trial results to clinical practice is challenging. In this study, we compared the quality of bowel preparations of real-world patients from clinical practice with those enrolled in several prospective trials. METHODS: Bowel preparation quality, defined by the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS), from four RCTs and one prospective trial were compared with two observational diary studies. Bowel preparations were polyethylene glycol preparation (PEG) or sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (P/MC) taken via traditional or split-dose timing regimen. Age, sex, average number of bowel movements per day, comorbidities, colonoscopy indication and colonoscopy completion rates were also collected. RESULTS: Patients enrolled in prospective trials had a better OBPS by one point when compared with those in observational clinical practice studies (P<0.049), after controlling for age, sex, colonoscopy indication and type of bowel preparation used. We also found that each 10-year increase in age was associated with a 0.2 point increase in OBPS (P=0.008), and men were associated with a 0.5 increase in OBPS when compared with women P=0.014). CONCLUSION: Patients from clinical practice have higher OBPS than prospective trial patients. Increased age and male sex were also associated with increased OBPS. We believe increased patient motivation and education around bowel preparation regimen plays an important role in the success of bowel preparations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7204808 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72048082020-05-11 Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials Wang, Chang (Nancy) Yang, Ruobing Hookey, Lawrence J Can Assoc Gastroenterol Original Articles BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for a high-quality colonoscopy. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated bowel preparation protocols, including split-dose and low-volume regimens. However, RCTs are conducted in an ideal, controlled setting, and translation of trial results to clinical practice is challenging. In this study, we compared the quality of bowel preparations of real-world patients from clinical practice with those enrolled in several prospective trials. METHODS: Bowel preparation quality, defined by the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS), from four RCTs and one prospective trial were compared with two observational diary studies. Bowel preparations were polyethylene glycol preparation (PEG) or sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (P/MC) taken via traditional or split-dose timing regimen. Age, sex, average number of bowel movements per day, comorbidities, colonoscopy indication and colonoscopy completion rates were also collected. RESULTS: Patients enrolled in prospective trials had a better OBPS by one point when compared with those in observational clinical practice studies (P<0.049), after controlling for age, sex, colonoscopy indication and type of bowel preparation used. We also found that each 10-year increase in age was associated with a 0.2 point increase in OBPS (P=0.008), and men were associated with a 0.5 increase in OBPS when compared with women P=0.014). CONCLUSION: Patients from clinical practice have higher OBPS than prospective trial patients. Increased age and male sex were also associated with increased OBPS. We believe increased patient motivation and education around bowel preparation regimen plays an important role in the success of bowel preparations. Oxford University Press 2020-06 2019-02-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7204808/ /pubmed/32395685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwy070 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Wang, Chang (Nancy) Yang, Ruobing Hookey, Lawrence Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title | Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title_full | Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title_fullStr | Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title_short | Does It work in Clinical Practice? A Comparison of Colonoscopy Cleansing Effectiveness in Clinical Practice Versus Efficacy from Selected Prospective Trials |
title_sort | does it work in clinical practice? a comparison of colonoscopy cleansing effectiveness in clinical practice versus efficacy from selected prospective trials |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7204808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwy070 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangchangnancy doesitworkinclinicalpracticeacomparisonofcolonoscopycleansingeffectivenessinclinicalpracticeversusefficacyfromselectedprospectivetrials AT yangruobing doesitworkinclinicalpracticeacomparisonofcolonoscopycleansingeffectivenessinclinicalpracticeversusefficacyfromselectedprospectivetrials AT hookeylawrence doesitworkinclinicalpracticeacomparisonofcolonoscopycleansingeffectivenessinclinicalpracticeversusefficacyfromselectedprospectivetrials |