Evaluación comparativa de efectividad y tolerabilidad con polietilenglicol y picosulfato de sodio-citrato de magnesio como agentes de preparación intestinal para colonoscopia
Nelson Muñoz P., M. Rodríguez G, Nicolás Campaña W., Solange Agar F., G. Campaña V.
{"title":"Evaluación comparativa de efectividad y tolerabilidad con polietilenglicol y picosulfato de sodio-citrato de magnesio como agentes de preparación intestinal para colonoscopia","authors":"Nelson Muñoz P., M. Rodríguez G, Nicolás Campaña W., Solange Agar F., G. Campaña V.","doi":"10.4067/S0718-40262018000300224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on multiple factors, being two of the most important ones an adequate bowel preparation and the patient’s tolerability to the preparation. Objectives: Compare effectiveness and tolerability of two bowel preparation agents, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC). Patients and Methods: Randomized clinical trial on outpatients that went into colonoscopy in INDISA Clinic. We evaluated effectiveness and tolerability with Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) and Lawrence questionnaire [composed by Likert scale, two qualitative questions and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain], respectively. Results: 189 patients, 123 were randomized to PEG and 66 to SPMC. BBPS average in patients in the PEG branch was 7.51 (SD 1.66) and for SPMC 7.12 (SD 1.71) (p = 0.111). Likert scale for evaluating tolerability average for PEG was 0.94 (SD 0.68) and for SPMC 0.63 (SD 0.61) (p = 0.0004). VAS scale for PEG had an average of 7.68 (SD 2.4) and for PSCM 9.04 (SD 1.59) (p < 0.0001). When we asked for workplace absenteeism, there were no significant differences between both groups and when we asked about using the same intestinal preparation in a future colonoscopy there was statistical significance in favor to SPMC (p = 0.026). Conclusions: No differences were noted on effectiveness between the PEG and SPMC bowel preparations. Nevertheless, SPMC appeared to be better tolerated by patients.","PeriodicalId":49615,"journal":{"name":"Revista Chilena De Cirugia","volume":"64 1","pages":"224-232"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Chilena De Cirugia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-40262018000300224","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Introduction: The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on multiple factors, being two of the most important ones an adequate bowel preparation and the patient’s tolerability to the preparation. Objectives: Compare effectiveness and tolerability of two bowel preparation agents, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC). Patients and Methods: Randomized clinical trial on outpatients that went into colonoscopy in INDISA Clinic. We evaluated effectiveness and tolerability with Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) and Lawrence questionnaire [composed by Likert scale, two qualitative questions and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain], respectively. Results: 189 patients, 123 were randomized to PEG and 66 to SPMC. BBPS average in patients in the PEG branch was 7.51 (SD 1.66) and for SPMC 7.12 (SD 1.71) (p = 0.111). Likert scale for evaluating tolerability average for PEG was 0.94 (SD 0.68) and for SPMC 0.63 (SD 0.61) (p = 0.0004). VAS scale for PEG had an average of 7.68 (SD 2.4) and for PSCM 9.04 (SD 1.59) (p < 0.0001). When we asked for workplace absenteeism, there were no significant differences between both groups and when we asked about using the same intestinal preparation in a future colonoscopy there was statistical significance in favor to SPMC (p = 0.026). Conclusions: No differences were noted on effectiveness between the PEG and SPMC bowel preparations. Nevertheless, SPMC appeared to be better tolerated by patients.
期刊介绍:
La Revista Chilena de Cirugía es un órgano de difusión del conocimiento y actividad quirúrgica. Su población objetivo son cirujanos, especialistas de otras áreas médicas, médicos generales y alumnos del área de la salud.
Sirve a cirujanos y otros especialistas, para publicar artículos originales e inéditos sobre temas médicos, en particular artículos de investigación básica y clínica, artículos de revisión, entre otros.
Buscan difundir y actualizar el conocimiento médico general y quirúrgico en particular. Se publica en forma bimestral.
La Revista Chilena de Cirugía está afiliada y patrocinada por la Sociedad de Cirujanos de Chilese desde el año 1952.