Modi Chintan, Depasquale Joseph R, Digiacomo W Scott, Malinowski Judith E, Engelhardt Kristen, Shaikh Sohail N, Kothari Shivangi T, Kottam Raghu, Shakov Rada, Maksoud Charbel, Baddoura Walid J, Spira Robert S
Department of Medical Education, Seton Hall University School of Graduate Medical Education, South Orange, NJ, USA.
Qual Prim Care. 2009;17(6):397-404.
High-quality bowel preparation is essential for successful outpatient colonoscopy. Currently, the rate of adequate bowel preparation for outpatient colonoscopy in the USA is low. Patients often fail to adhere to recommended preparation instructions. Limited literature exists on evaluating educational intervention as a means of improving the quality of bowel preparation prior to outpatient colonoscopy.
Our objective was to determine the effect of an educational intervention on the quality of outpatient colonoscopy preparation. The secondary objective was to determine whether the quality of bowel preparation improves overall colonoscopy outcomes as measured by rate of polyp detection and caecal intubation time.
A single-blinded, prospective, randomised, controlled trial was conducted in two inner-city gastroenterology clinics in the USA. One hundred and sixty-four subjects were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of two groups. The control group subjects received verbal and written instructions for colonoscopy. The intervention group subjects received the same instructions and were then asked to answer a questionnaire. The subjects' responses were reviewed and an additional explanation of the preparation process provided. An attending gastroenterologist determined the quality of each bowel preparation at the time of colonoscopy using the Universal Preparation Assessment Scale.
The educational intervention had no impact on the overall quality of bowel preparation (P=0.12). However, the type of food (liquid vs solid) consumed during the 24 hours prior to the procedure (P=0.04) and the time since the last solid meal (P=0.03) did have an impact on preparation quality. Other significant factors included elapsed time to first bowel movement from the initiation of bowel preparation (P=0.05) and age younger than 55 (P=0.02). Adequate bowel preparation was associated with shorter total procedure (P=0.001) and caecal intubation (P=0.01) times.
Our study failed to demonstrate any effect of an educational intervention on the quality of colonoscopy preparation. However, adherence to simple dietary instructions did have a significant impact on the quality of bowel preparation. Adequate bowel preparation was associated with shorter procedure time and caecal intubation time.
高质量的肠道准备对于门诊结肠镜检查的成功至关重要。目前,美国门诊结肠镜检查肠道准备充分的比例较低。患者常常未能遵循推荐的准备说明。关于评估教育干预作为提高门诊结肠镜检查前肠道准备质量的手段的文献有限。
我们的目的是确定教育干预对门诊结肠镜检查准备质量的影响。次要目的是确定肠道准备质量是否能改善结肠镜检查的总体结果,以息肉检出率和盲肠插管时间来衡量。
在美国两家市中心的胃肠病诊所进行了一项单盲、前瞻性、随机对照试验。164名受试者被纳入并随机分配到两组中的一组。对照组受试者接受结肠镜检查的口头和书面指导。干预组受试者接受相同的指导,然后被要求回答一份问卷。对受试者的回答进行审查,并提供准备过程的额外解释。一名主治胃肠病学家在结肠镜检查时使用通用准备评估量表确定每次肠道准备的质量。
教育干预对肠道准备的总体质量没有影响(P = 0.12)。然而,检查前24小时内食用的食物类型(液体与固体)(P = 0.04)以及距最后一顿固体食物的时间(P = 0.03)确实对准备质量有影响。其他重要因素包括从开始肠道准备到首次排便的时间(P = 0.05)和年龄小于55岁(P = 0.02)。充分的肠道准备与较短的总检查时间(P = 0.001)和盲肠插管时间(P = 0.01)相关。
我们的研究未能证明教育干预对结肠镜检查准备质量有任何影响。然而,遵守简单的饮食指导确实对肠道准备质量有显著影响。充分的肠道准备与较短的检查时间和盲肠插管时间相关。