Wang Chang Nancy, Yang Ruobing, Hookey Lawrence
Queen's University School of Medicine, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. 2020 Jun;3(3):111-119. doi: 10.1093/jcag/gwy070. Epub 2019 Feb 12.
Adequate bowel preparation is essential for a high-quality colonoscopy. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated bowel preparation protocols, including split-dose and low-volume regimens. However, RCTs are conducted in an ideal, controlled setting, and translation of trial results to clinical practice is challenging. In this study, we compared the quality of bowel preparations of real-world patients from clinical practice with those enrolled in several prospective trials.
Bowel preparation quality, defined by the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS), from four RCTs and one prospective trial were compared with two observational diary studies. Bowel preparations were polyethylene glycol preparation (PEG) or sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (P/MC) taken via traditional or split-dose timing regimen. Age, sex, average number of bowel movements per day, comorbidities, colonoscopy indication and colonoscopy completion rates were also collected.
Patients enrolled in prospective trials had a better OBPS by one point when compared with those in observational clinical practice studies (P<0.049), after controlling for age, sex, colonoscopy indication and type of bowel preparation used. We also found that each 10-year increase in age was associated with a 0.2 point increase in OBPS (P=0.008), and men were associated with a 0.5 increase in OBPS when compared with women P=0.014).
Patients from clinical practice have higher OBPS than prospective trial patients. Increased age and male sex were also associated with increased OBPS. We believe increased patient motivation and education around bowel preparation regimen plays an important role in the success of bowel preparations.
充分的肠道准备对于高质量的结肠镜检查至关重要。许多随机对照试验(RCT)已经研究了肠道准备方案,包括分剂量和小容量方案。然而,RCT是在理想的、可控的环境中进行的,将试验结果转化为临床实践具有挑战性。在本研究中,我们比较了临床实践中真实患者与几项前瞻性试验中入组患者的肠道准备质量。
采用渥太华肠道准备量表(OBPS)定义肠道准备质量,将四项RCT和一项前瞻性试验的结果与两项观察性日记研究进行比较。肠道准备采用聚乙二醇制剂(PEG)或匹可硫酸钠加柠檬酸镁(P/MC),通过传统或分剂量给药方案服用。还收集了年龄、性别、每日平均排便次数、合并症、结肠镜检查指征和结肠镜检查完成率。
在控制年龄、性别、结肠镜检查指征和所用肠道准备类型后,与观察性临床实践研究中的患者相比,前瞻性试验中的患者OBPS得分高1分(P<0.049)。我们还发现,年龄每增加10岁,OBPS得分增加0.2分(P=0.008),男性与女性相比,OBPS得分增加0.5分(P=0.014)。
临床实践中的患者OBPS得分高于前瞻性试验患者。年龄增加和男性也与OBPS得分增加有关。我们认为,提高患者对肠道准备方案的积极性和教育在肠道准备成功中起着重要作用。