Chang Chen-Wang, Shih Shou-Chuan, Wang Horng-Yuan, Chu Cheng-Hsin, Wang Tsang-En, Hung Chien-Yuan, Shieh Tze-Yu, Lin Yang-Sheng, Chen Ming-Jen
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan ; Evidence Base Medicine Center, Department of Medical Education, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan ; MacKay Junior College of Medicine, Nursing and Management, Taipei, Taiwan ; MacKay Medical College, New Taipei, Taiwan.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan ; MacKay Junior College of Medicine, Nursing and Management, Taipei, Taiwan ; MacKay Medical College, New Taipei, Taiwan.
Endosc Int Open. 2015 Dec;3(6):E646-52. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1392365. Epub 2015 Jun 24.
The proportion of outpatients with inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy is high owing to patient unawareness of its importance and poor adherence to instructions. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of educational intervention on the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy.
A comprehensive literature review identified randomized controlled trials measuring the effect of educational intervention on the quality of bowel preparation. Two reviewers independently screened relevant articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome was the quality of each bowel preparation before colonoscopy, using a particular assessment scale. The secondary outcomes were polyp detection rates during the procedure and the need for a repeat colonoscopy due to incomplete examination.
Nine randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. In all, 2885 patients were enrolled, with 1458 receiving education and 1427 assigned to the control group. An educational intervention before colonoscopy significantly improved bowel preparation (relative risk [RR] = 1.22; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.10 - 1.36), however, no significant differences were identified in polyp detection rates (RR = 1.14; 95 %CI 0.87 - 1.51) or the need for repeat colonoscopy (RR = 0.52; 95 %CI 0.25 - 1.04) between the groups. Asymmetry in the appearance of the funnel plot and the result of Egger test (P < 0.001) suggested that publication bias existed.
Evidence from these randomized controlled trials shows that a brief counseling session with patients before colonoscopy ensures better bowel preparation. However, evidence is insufficient to assess improvements in polyp detection rate and avoidance of a repeat colonoscopy. Despite these encouraging observations, this meta-analysis had some limitations, including potential publication bias and significant heterogeneity of the types of bowel purgatives. These results should be interpreted with caution.
由于患者对结肠镜检查前肠道准备重要性的认识不足以及对医嘱的依从性差,门诊患者肠道准备不充分的比例较高。本荟萃分析旨在确定教育干预对结肠镜检查前肠道准备质量的影响。
全面的文献综述确定了测量教育干预对肠道准备质量影响的随机对照试验。两名研究者独立筛选相关文章、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。主要结局是使用特定评估量表评估结肠镜检查前每次肠道准备的质量。次要结局是检查过程中的息肉检出率以及因检查不完整而需要再次进行结肠镜检查的情况。
本荟萃分析纳入了9项随机对照试验。总共纳入2885例患者,其中1458例接受教育,1427例被分配到对照组。结肠镜检查前的教育干预显著改善了肠道准备情况(相对危险度[RR]=1.22;95%置信区间[CI],1.10 - 1.36),然而,两组之间在息肉检出率(RR=1.14;95%CI 0.87 - 1.51)或再次进行结肠镜检查的必要性(RR=0.52;95%CI 0.25 - 1.04)方面未发现显著差异。漏斗图外观的不对称性和Egger检验结果(P<0.001)表明存在发表偏倚。
这些随机对照试验的证据表明,结肠镜检查前对患者进行简短的咨询可确保更好的肠道准备。然而,证据不足以评估息肉检出率的改善情况以及避免再次进行结肠镜检查的情况。尽管有这些令人鼓舞的观察结果,但本荟萃分析存在一些局限性,包括潜在的发表偏倚和肠道泻药类型的显著异质性。这些结果应谨慎解读。