Suppr超能文献

比较用于改善结肠镜检查肠道准备的泻药服用模式:一项前瞻性随机临床试验。

Comparison of patterns of laxative ingestion to improve bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a pilot randomized clinical trial.

作者信息

Laiyemo Adeyinka O, Idowu Kolapo A, Burnside Clinton, Williams Carla D, Jack Momodu, Mekasha Getachew, Ashktorab Hassan, Brim Hassan, Lee Edward L, Sanderson Andrew K, Kibreab Angesom, Kwagyan John

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, District of Columbia, United States.

Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.

出版信息

Endosc Int Open. 2020 May;8(5):E617-E622. doi: 10.1055/a-1118-3526. Epub 2020 Apr 17.

Abstract

Negative experiences with bowel preparation are a barrier to uptake of colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of different flavoring of polyethylene glycol (PEG) laxatives on patient satisfaction with and adequacy of bowel preparation during colonoscopy.  This was a single-blind (endoscopist), parallel design, randomized trial (NCT02062112) during which patients scheduled for colonoscopy were assigned to one of three groups: Group 1 (no laxative flavoring, n = 84); Group 2 (flavored entire laxative, n = 90) and Group 3 (tasted PEG with and without flavoring and decided how they want to drink the rest of the laxatives (choice group), n = 82). Patients rated their bowel preparation experience (satisfaction) and endoscopists accessed adequacy of bowel preparation during colonoscopy.  There were no differences in patient ratings across the groups (1, 2 and 3) in taste of the laxatives (  = 0.67), ease of drinking (  = 0.53), and overall experience of bowel preparation process (  = 0.18). However, higher percentage of patients in the choice group would want the same laxative again if they were going to have a repeat colonoscopy in the future (72.5 % vs 81.3 % vs 88.9 %,  = 0.04). Surprisingly, adequacy of bowel preparation was highest among patients who drank their PEG unflavored (89.3 % vs 80 % vs 75.5 %,  = 0.07) and the had highest rates of adenoma detection (40.5 % vs 23.3 vs 39.0,  = 0.03).  There were no differences in overall tolerability of bowel preparation by patterns of flavoring of PEG. Those who drank unflavored PEG were less satisfied but had better clinical outcome, suggesting minimum justification effect in bowel preparation process.

摘要

肠道准备的负面体验是结肠镜检查普及的障碍。本研究的目的是探讨聚乙二醇(PEG)泻药不同调味剂对结肠镜检查期间患者对肠道准备的满意度及充分性的影响。 这是一项单盲(内镜医师)、平行设计的随机试验(NCT02062112),在此期间,计划进行结肠镜检查的患者被分为三组之一:第1组(无泻药调味剂,n = 84);第2组(整个泻药有调味剂,n = 90)和第3组(品尝有或无调味剂的PEG并决定如何饮用其余泻药(选择组),n = 82)。患者对其肠道准备体验(满意度)进行评分,内镜医师评估结肠镜检查期间肠道准备的充分性。 各组(1、2和3组)在泻药味道(P = 0.67)、饮用难易程度(P = 0.53)和肠道准备过程的总体体验(P = 0.18)方面,患者评分没有差异。然而,如果将来再次进行结肠镜检查,选择组中更高比例的患者希望再次使用相同的泻药(72.5%对81.3%对88.9%,P = 0.04)。令人惊讶的是,饮用未调味PEG的患者肠道准备充分性最高(89.3%对80%对75.5%,P = 0.07),腺瘤检出率也最高(40.5%对23.3%对39.0%,P = 0.03)。 PEG调味模式对肠道准备的总体耐受性没有差异。饮用未调味PEG的患者满意度较低,但临床结果较好,这表明在肠道准备过程中存在最小化理由效应。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8176/7165003/7fec3e2e9105/10-1055-a-1118-3526-i1712ei1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验