Cargando…

Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Open‐access (OA) colonoscopies are defined as those scheduled without a gastrointestinal (GI) office visit. Past research has not focused on split preparation use and patient perception within OA. We aim to identify differences in bowel preparation (BP) adequacy, adenoma detectio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manem, Nihita, Donovan, Katherine, Miller, David, Yodice, Michael, Wang, Katie, Balogun, Khadijat, Kabbach, Ghassan, Feustel, Paul, Tadros, Micheal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8114982/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34013055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12532
_version_ 1783691153883791360
author Manem, Nihita
Donovan, Katherine
Miller, David
Yodice, Michael
Wang, Katie
Balogun, Khadijat
Kabbach, Ghassan
Feustel, Paul
Tadros, Micheal
author_facet Manem, Nihita
Donovan, Katherine
Miller, David
Yodice, Michael
Wang, Katie
Balogun, Khadijat
Kabbach, Ghassan
Feustel, Paul
Tadros, Micheal
author_sort Manem, Nihita
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIM: Open‐access (OA) colonoscopies are defined as those scheduled without a gastrointestinal (GI) office visit. Past research has not focused on split preparation use and patient perception within OA. We aim to identify differences in bowel preparation (BP) adequacy, adenoma detection rate (ADR), self‐reported compliance, and patient perception between OA and GI providers using split prep. METHODS: This was a cross‐sectional study using split BP for colonoscopies. Patients completed a survey, and demographics, BP adequacy, and ADR were recorded. BP compliance was self‐reported. Patients were asked three questions qualifying the BP instructions. Data were analyzed using chi square and Mann–Whitney tests by SPSS. RESULTS: BP adequacy was reported for 56 of 60 patients. Twenty‐one participants (38%) were scheduled on OA, and 35 participants (62%) were scheduled after a GI office visit. Adequate BP was more frequent in 86% (18/21) of OA patients compared to 60% (21/35) in the GI group (P = 0.043). OA patients reported better review and explanation of the BP instructions compared to GI patients. There was no statistical difference between the demographics of the OA and GI groups or self‐reported compliance and patient understanding of instructions. CONCLUSION: OA scheduled colonoscopies were associated with more adequate BP. This could be explained by patients' self‐motivation or an explanation of the importance of completing BP. This study supports the use of OA procedures as a standard of care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8114982
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81149822021-05-18 Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation Manem, Nihita Donovan, Katherine Miller, David Yodice, Michael Wang, Katie Balogun, Khadijat Kabbach, Ghassan Feustel, Paul Tadros, Micheal JGH Open Original Articles BACKGROUND AND AIM: Open‐access (OA) colonoscopies are defined as those scheduled without a gastrointestinal (GI) office visit. Past research has not focused on split preparation use and patient perception within OA. We aim to identify differences in bowel preparation (BP) adequacy, adenoma detection rate (ADR), self‐reported compliance, and patient perception between OA and GI providers using split prep. METHODS: This was a cross‐sectional study using split BP for colonoscopies. Patients completed a survey, and demographics, BP adequacy, and ADR were recorded. BP compliance was self‐reported. Patients were asked three questions qualifying the BP instructions. Data were analyzed using chi square and Mann–Whitney tests by SPSS. RESULTS: BP adequacy was reported for 56 of 60 patients. Twenty‐one participants (38%) were scheduled on OA, and 35 participants (62%) were scheduled after a GI office visit. Adequate BP was more frequent in 86% (18/21) of OA patients compared to 60% (21/35) in the GI group (P = 0.043). OA patients reported better review and explanation of the BP instructions compared to GI patients. There was no statistical difference between the demographics of the OA and GI groups or self‐reported compliance and patient understanding of instructions. CONCLUSION: OA scheduled colonoscopies were associated with more adequate BP. This could be explained by patients' self‐motivation or an explanation of the importance of completing BP. This study supports the use of OA procedures as a standard of care. Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 2021-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8114982/ /pubmed/34013055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12532 Text en © 2021 The Authors. JGH Open: An open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Manem, Nihita
Donovan, Katherine
Miller, David
Yodice, Michael
Wang, Katie
Balogun, Khadijat
Kabbach, Ghassan
Feustel, Paul
Tadros, Micheal
Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title_full Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title_fullStr Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title_full_unstemmed Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title_short Open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
title_sort open‐access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split‐dose bowel preparation
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8114982/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34013055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12532
work_keys_str_mv AT manemnihita openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT donovankatherine openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT millerdavid openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT yodicemichael openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT wangkatie openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT balogunkhadijat openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT kabbachghassan openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT feustelpaul openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation
AT tadrosmicheal openaccesscolonoscopyqualityindicatorsandpatientperceptionusingsplitdosebowelpreparation