Song Ki Hwan, Suh Wu Seok, Jeong Jin Sik, Kim Dong Sik, Kim Sang Woo, Kwak Dong Min, Hwang Jong Seong, Kim Hyun Jin, Park Man Woo, Shim Min Chul, Koo Ja-Il, Kim Jae Hwang, Shon Dae Ho
Coloproctology Center, Goo Hospital, Daegu, Korea.
Department of Surgery, Yeungnam University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Ann Coloproctol. 2014 Oct;30(5):222-7. doi: 10.3393/ac.2014.30.5.222. Epub 2014 Oct 28.
Bowel preparation with sodium phosphate was recently prohibited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is safe and effective; however, it is difficult to drink. To identify an easy bowel preparation method for colonoscopy, we evaluated three different bowel preparation regimens regarding their efficacy and patient satisfaction.
In this randomized, comparative study, 892 patients who visited a secondary referral hospital for a colonoscopy between November 2012 and February 2013 were enrolled. Three regimens were evaluated: three packets of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (PICO, group A), two packets of PICO with 1 L of PEG (PICO + PEG 1 L, group B), and two packets of PICO with 2 L of PEG (PICO + PEG 2 L, group C). A questionnaire survey regarding the patients' preference for the bowel preparation regimen and satisfaction was conducted before the colonoscopies. The quality of bowel cleansing was scored by the colonoscopists who used the Aronchick scoring scale and the Ottawa scale.
The patients' satisfaction rate regarding the regimens were 72% in group A, 64% in group B, and 45.9% in group C. Nausea and abdominal bloating caused by the regimens were more frequent in group C than in group A or group B (P < 0.01). Group C showed the lowest preference rate compared to the other groups (P < 0.01). Group C showed better right colon cleansing efficacy than group A or group B.
Group A exhibited a better result than group B or group C in patient satisfaction and preference. In the cleansing quality, no difference was noted between groups A and C.
美国食品药品监督管理局最近禁止使用磷酸钠进行肠道准备。聚乙二醇（PEG）安全有效，但难以下咽。为确定一种便于结肠镜检查的肠道准备方法，我们评估了三种不同肠道准备方案的效果及患者满意度。
在这项随机对照研究中，纳入了2012年11月至2013年2月期间到一家二级转诊医院进行结肠镜检查的892例患者。评估了三种方案：三包匹可硫酸钠/枸橼酸镁（PICO，A组）、两包PICO加1升PEG（PICO + PEG 1升，B组）和两包PICO加2升PEG（PICO + PEG 2升，C组）。在结肠镜检查前进行了一项关于患者对肠道准备方案的偏好和满意度的问卷调查。肠道清洁质量由使用阿隆奇克评分量表和渥太华量表的结肠镜医师进行评分。
患者对各方案的满意度在A组为72%，B组为64%，C组为45.9%。C组因方案导致的恶心和腹胀比A组或B组更频繁（P < 0.01）。与其他组相比，C组的偏好率最低（P < 0.01）。C组在右半结肠清洁效果方面优于A组或B组。
A组在患者满意度和偏好方面比B组或C组表现更好。在清洁质量方面，A组和C组之间未发现差异。
