A PREDICTIVE SCORE OF INADEQUATE BOWEL PREPARATION BASED ON A SELF-ADMINISTRED QUESTIONNAIRE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Berger ◽  
E Cesbron-Métivier ◽  
S Bertrais ◽  
A Olivier ◽  
A Becq ◽  
...  
Endoscopy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (06) ◽  
pp. 536-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Gimeno-García ◽  
Jose Baute ◽  
Goretti Hernandez ◽  
Dalia Morales ◽  
Carmen Gonzalez-Pérez ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and study aim Inadequate bowel cleansing negatively affects the efficiency of colonoscopy in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to design and validate a predictive model for inadequate bowel cleanliness. Patients and methods The model was built from 667 consecutive outpatients (development cohort) who were prospectively scheduled for colonoscopy between June and September 2014. The validation cohort included 409 outpatients who underwent colonoscopy between October and December 2014. Cleansing was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Bowel preparation was administered on the same day as the examination. Results In the development cohort, BBPS was adequate in 541 patients (81.1 %). At multivariate analysis, antidepressants (odds ratio [OR] 4.25, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.91 – 9.47), co-morbidity (OR 3.35, 95 %CI 2.16 – 5.18), constipation (OR 2.09, 95 %CI 1.29 – 3.40), and abdominal/pelvic surgery (OR 1.60, 95 %CI 1.03 – 2.47) were independent predictors for inadequate cleansing. The model built with these variables showed an area under the curve of 0.72 in the development cohort and 0.70 in the validation cohort. A cutoff of 1.225 predicted inadequate bowel preparation with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 60.3 % (95 %CI 51.6 – 68.4), 75.4 % (95 %CI 71.6 – 78.9), 36.4 % (95 %CI 30.1 – 43.1), and 89.1 % (95 %CI 85.9 – 91.6) in the development cohort, and 50.0 % (95 %CI 38.1 – 61.9), 80.0 % (95 %CI 75.3 – 84.2), 35.7 % (95 %CI 26.4 – 45.6), and 87.9 % (95 %CI 83.7 – 91.3) in the validation cohort. Conclusion A simple score may assist the clinician in predicting which patients are at high risk of inadequate bowel cleanliness. This may guide changes in bowel preparation strategy accordingly.


Author(s):  
Arthur Berger ◽  
Elodie Cesbron-Métivier ◽  
Sandrine Bertrais ◽  
Anne Olivier ◽  
Aymeric Becq ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2740
Author(s):  
Efrat L. Amitay ◽  
Tobias Niedermaier ◽  
Anton Gies ◽  
Michael Hoffmeister ◽  
Hermann Brenner

The success of a colonoscopy in detecting and removing pre-cancerous and cancerous lesions depends heavily on the quality of bowel preparation. Despite efforts, 20–44% of colonoscopy participants have an inadequate bowel preparation. We aimed to assess and compare risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and for the presence of advanced colorectal neoplasms in routine screening practice. In this cross-sectional study, among 8125 participants of screening colonoscopy in Germany with a comprehensive assessment of sociodemographic factors, lifestyle and medical history, we examined factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation and with findings of advanced neoplasms using adjusted log-binomial regression models. Among the identified risk factors assessed, three factors were identified that were significantly associated with inadequate bowel preparation: age ≥ 70 years (adjusted prevalence ratios, aPR, 1.50 95%CI 1.31–1.71), smoking (aPR 1.29 95%CI 1.11–1.50) and abdominal symptoms (aPR 1.14 95%CI 1.02–1.27). The same risk factors were also associated with the prevalence of advanced neoplasms in our study (aPR 1.72, 1.62 and 1.44, respectively). The risk factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation in this study were also associated with a higher risk for advanced neoplasms. Inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy might lead to missed colorectal cancer (CRC) precursors and the late diagnosis of CRC. People at high risk of advanced neoplasms are in particular need of enhanced bowel preparation.


2014 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. S-736-S-737
Author(s):  
Jodie A. Barkin ◽  
Daniel A. Sussman ◽  
James S. Leavitt ◽  
Jamie S. Barkin

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 1082-1091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Guo ◽  
Xin Shi ◽  
Xiaoyu Kang ◽  
Hui Luo ◽  
Xiangping Wang ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 382-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reid L. Hopkins ◽  
David Parsons ◽  
Leonie Hoyo ◽  
Brian C. Jacobson

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (8) ◽  
pp. 819-826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sultan Mahmood ◽  
Samid M. Farooqui ◽  
Mohammad F. Madhoun

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document