Back to Search Start Over

A randomized controlled trial of an educational video to improve quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors :
Jin-Seok Park
Min Su Kim
HyungKil Kim
Shin Il Kim
Chun Ho Shin
Hyun Jung Lee
Won Seop Lee
Soyoung Moon
Park, Jin-Seok
Kim, Min Su
Kim, HyungKil
Kim, Shin Il
Shin, Chun Ho
Lee, Hyun Jung
Lee, Won Seop
Moon, Soyoung
Source :
BMC Gastroenterology; 6/17/2016, Vol. 16, p1-8, 8p, 1 Color Photograph, 1 Diagram, 4 Charts
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>High-quality bowel preparation is necessary for colonoscopy. A few studies have been conducted to investigate improvement in bowel preparation quality through patient education. However, the effect of patient education on bowel preparation has not been well studied.<bold>Methods: </bold>A randomized and prospective study was conducted. All patients received regular instruction for bowel preparation during a pre-colonoscopy visit. Those scheduled for colonoscopy were randomly assigned to view an educational video instruction (video group) on the day before the colonoscopy, or to a non-video (control) group. Qualities of bowel preparation using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality scale (Ottawa score) were compared between the video and non-video groups. In addition, factors associated with poor bowel preparation were investigated.<bold>Result: </bold>A total of 502 patients were randomized, 250 to the video group and 252 to the non-video group. The video group exhibited better bowel preparation (mean Ottawa total score: 3.03 ± 1.9) than the non-video group (4.21 ± 1.9; P < 0.001) and had good bowel preparation for colonoscopy (total Ottawa score <6: 91.6 % vs. 78.5 %; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that males (odds ratio [OR] = 1.95, P = 0.029), diabetes mellitus patients (OR = 2.79, P = 0.021), and non-use of visual aids (OR = 3.09, P < 0.001) were associated with poor bowel preparation. In the comparison of the colonoscopic outcomes between groups, the polyp detection rate was not significantly different between video group and non-video group (48/250, 19.2 % vs. 48/252, 19.0 %; P = 0.963), but insertion time was significantly short in video group (5.5 ± 3.2 min) than non-video group (6.1 ± 3.7 min; P = 0.043).<bold>Conclusion: </bold>The addition of an educational video could improve the quality of bowel preparation in comparison with standard preparation method.<bold>Trial Registration: </bold>Clinical Research Information Service KCT0001836 . The date of registration: March, 08(th), 2016, Retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1471230X
Volume :
16
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
BMC Gastroenterology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
116286547
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-016-0476-6