Impact of Video Aid on Quality of Bowel Preparation Among Patients Undergoing Outpatient Screening Colonoscopy.

Clinical Medicine Insights. Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2018-10-08 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179552218803304
Sanna Fatima, Deepanshu Jain, Christopher Hibbard
{"title":"Impact of Video Aid on Quality of Bowel Preparation Among Patients Undergoing Outpatient Screening Colonoscopy.","authors":"Sanna Fatima,&nbsp;Deepanshu Jain,&nbsp;Christopher Hibbard","doi":"10.1177/1179552218803304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate the effect of video aid on quality of bowel preparation.</p><p><strong>Study: </strong>A retrospective study was done on patients undergoing outpatient screening colonoscopy. All subjects received educational video prior to colonoscopy in addition to the standard counseling. Patient charts were reviewed to collect data regarding quality of bowel preparation (adequate or inadequate). The study population was stratified into four groups according to viewing status: Group I 0% (control group), Group II <50%, Group III >50% to <75%, and Group IV watched ⩾75% of the video.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 338 patients with an average age of 59.1 years and 60.3% females were included in the final study cohort. Of the patients in Groups I, II, III, and IV, 94.3%, 90.9%, 100%, and 91.7%, respectively, had adequate preparation (<i>P</i> value = .827). Adenoma detection rate (ADR) for Groups I, II, III, and IV was 28.8%, 50%, 50%, and 22.6%, respectively (<i>P</i> value = .305). The mean cecal intubation time was 20.7, 16.4, 16.57, and 17 minutes for Groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively (<i>P</i> value = .041).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Video aid use for patients undergoing screening colonoscopy lacked a statistically significant impact on the quality of bowel preparation, ADR, and advanced adenoma detection rate when compared with standard practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":10382,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Medicine Insights. Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":"1179552218803304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179552218803304","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Medicine Insights. Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179552218803304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To investigate the effect of video aid on quality of bowel preparation.

Study: A retrospective study was done on patients undergoing outpatient screening colonoscopy. All subjects received educational video prior to colonoscopy in addition to the standard counseling. Patient charts were reviewed to collect data regarding quality of bowel preparation (adequate or inadequate). The study population was stratified into four groups according to viewing status: Group I 0% (control group), Group II <50%, Group III >50% to <75%, and Group IV watched ⩾75% of the video.

Results: A total of 338 patients with an average age of 59.1 years and 60.3% females were included in the final study cohort. Of the patients in Groups I, II, III, and IV, 94.3%, 90.9%, 100%, and 91.7%, respectively, had adequate preparation (P value = .827). Adenoma detection rate (ADR) for Groups I, II, III, and IV was 28.8%, 50%, 50%, and 22.6%, respectively (P value = .305). The mean cecal intubation time was 20.7, 16.4, 16.57, and 17 minutes for Groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively (P value = .041).

Conclusions: Video aid use for patients undergoing screening colonoscopy lacked a statistically significant impact on the quality of bowel preparation, ADR, and advanced adenoma detection rate when compared with standard practice.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

视频辅助对门诊结肠镜筛查患者肠道准备质量的影响。
目的:探讨视频辅助对肠准备质量的影响。研究:对门诊结肠镜筛查患者进行回顾性研究。所有受试者在结肠镜检查前除了接受标准咨询外,还接受了教育视频。回顾患者病历,收集有关肠道准备质量(适当或不充分)的数据。研究人群根据观看情况分为四组:组I 0%(对照组),组II 50%至结果:最终研究队列共纳入338例患者,平均年龄59.1岁,其中女性60.3%。I、II、III、IV组患者术前准备充分的比例分别为94.3%、90.9%、100%、91.7% (P值= 0.827)。ⅰ组、ⅱ组、ⅲ组、ⅳ组的腺瘤检出率(ADR)分别为28.8%、50%、50%、22.6% (P值= 0.305)。I、II、III、IV组平均盲肠插管时间分别为20.7、16.4、16.57、17分钟(P值= 0.041)。结论:与标准做法相比,在筛查性结肠镜检查患者中使用视频辅助对肠准备质量、不良反应和晚期腺瘤检出率没有统计学意义的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Medicine Insights. Gastroenterology
Clinical Medicine Insights. Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信