scholarly journals Effect of an intensive patient educational programme on the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a single-blind randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e000376
Author(s):  
Sivakami Janahiraman ◽  
Chan Yen Tay ◽  
Jie Min Lee ◽  
Wen Ling Lim ◽  
Chun Hoe Khiew ◽  
...  

ObjectivePreprocedural bowel preparation is necessary for optimal colonoscopy visualisation. However, it is challenging to achieve high-quality bowel preparation among patients scheduled for colonoscopy. This study aims to evaluate the impact of an intensive patient educational programme on the quality of bowel preparation.DesignAn accessor-blinded randomised controlled trial was carried out at the outpatient surgical clinic of a tertiary hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to the control group (received standard written and verbal instructions) or the experimental group (received an intensive and structured educational programme). All subjects completed a questionnaire before colonoscopy to assess their compliance, acceptability, and tolerability towards bowel preparation regime. Quality of bowel preparation was determined using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).ResultsA total of 300 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited. The experimental group had a significantly higher proportion of good quality bowel preparation than the control group (98.7% vs 52.3%, p<0.001). The median total BBPS score was also significantly higher in the experimental group (8 vs 5, p<0.001). Factors associated with good quality of bowel preparation included educational programme (OR: 22.79, 95% CI: 4.23 to 122.85, p<0.001), compliance to bowel cleansing agent (OR: 24.98, 95% CI 3.12 to 199.71, p<0.001), very difficult acceptability of preparation (OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38, p<0.001), tolerability towards bowel preparation (OR: 4.98, 95% CI 1.44 to 17.20, p<0.011) and hypomotility drugs (OR: 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.91, p<0.05).ConclusionAn intensive patient educational programme can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

BMJ ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 328 (7441) ◽  
pp. 673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Schroter ◽  
Nick Black ◽  
Stephen Evans ◽  
James Carpenter ◽  
Fiona Godlee ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.Design Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.Setting and participants Reviewers at a general medical journal.Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trials.Main outcome measures Quality of reviews of three manuscripts sent to reviewers at four to six monthly intervals, evaluated using the validated review quality instrument; number of deliberate major errors identified; time taken to review the manuscripts; proportion recommending rejection of the manuscripts.Results Reviewers in the self taught group scored higher in review quality after training than did the control group (score 2.85 v 2.56; difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.44; P = 0.001), but the difference was not of editorial significance and was not maintained in the long term. Both intervention groups identified significantly more major errors after training than did the control group (3.14 and 2.96 v 2.13; P < 0.001), and this remained significant after the reviewers' performance at baseline assessment was taken into account. The evidence for benefit of training was no longer apparent on further testing six months after the interventions. Training had no impact on the time taken to review the papers but was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending rejection (92% and 84% v 76%; P = 0.002).Conclusions Short training packages have only a slight impact on the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions needs to be assessed.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna María Pálsdóttir ◽  
Kjerstin Stigmar ◽  
Bo Norrving ◽  
Patrik Grahn ◽  
Ingemar F Petersson ◽  
...  

Abstract Fatigue is common after stroke and contributes to disability and impaired quality of life. Currently, there is insufficient evidence on the efficacy of any intervention for post-stroke fatigue. The aim of the study was to examine whether 10 weeks Nature-based rehabilitation (NRB) as add-on to standard care may improve post-stroke fatigue, perceived value of everyday occupations, function, activity and participation compared to standard care only (Clinical Trial.gov Identifier: NCT02435043, 2012/352, 05-06-2015). The study was carried out as a single blinded two-armed randomised controlled trial. Stroke survivors identified through routine 3-month follow-up visit (sub-acute) or medical records (chronic stroke > 1 year earlier) were randomised to Standard care + NBR or Standard care only. Blinded evaluations were conducted at follow-up 8 and 14 months after randomisation. The primary outcomes were post-stroke fatigue (Mental Fatigue Scale, total score) and perceived value of everyday occupations (Oval-pd) 8 months after randomisation. About a quarter of the screened patients were eligible; half accepted to participate and 101 were randomised, mean age 67 years, 60% female. The patients with sub-acute stroke were highly compliant with the intervention. Fatigue decreased to a value below the suggested cut-off for mental fatigue (<10.5) in the intervention group but not in the control group; no statistically significant differences were found though between the groups. Conclusion: NASTRU is the first randomised study on NBR for patients with post stroke fatigue. NBR was feasible and well tolerated. The study was underpowered due to difficulties in recruiting participants. No significant differences were detected between intervention and control group. A larger RCT is warranted. Keywords: clinical trial, enriched environment, everyday occupations, horticulture therapy, quality of life.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9507-9507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janette L. Vardy ◽  
Melanie Bell ◽  
Hidde van der Ploeg ◽  
Jane Turner ◽  
Michael Kabourakis ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2021-003068
Author(s):  
Ting Ting Tan ◽  
Maw Pin Tan ◽  
Chee Loong Lam ◽  
Ee Chin Loh ◽  
David Paul Capelle ◽  
...  

ContextNumerous studies have shown that gratitude can reduce stress and improve quality of life.ObjectiveOur study aimed to examine the effect of mindful gratitude journaling on suffering, psychological distress and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer.MethodsWe conducted a parallel-group, blinded, randomised controlled trial at the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. Ninety-two adult patients with advanced cancer, and an overall suffering score ≥4/10 based on the Suffering Pictogram were recruited and randomly assigned to either a mindful gratitude journaling group (N=49) or a routine journaling group (N=43).ResultsAfter 1 week, there were significant reductions in the overall suffering score from the baseline in both the intervention group (mean difference in overall suffering score=−2.0, 95% CI=−2.7 to −1.4, t=−6.125, p=0.000) and the control group (mean difference in overall suffering score=−1.6, 95% CI=−2.3 to −0.8, t=−4.106, p=0.037). There were also significant improvements in the total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score (mean difference=−3.4, 95% CI=−5.3 to −1.5, t=−3.525, p=0.000) and the total Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being score (mean difference=7.3, 95% CI=1.5 to 13.1, t=2.460, p=0.014) in the intervention group after 7 days, but not in the control group.ConclusionThe results provide evidence that 7 days of mindful gratitude journaling could positively affect the state of suffering, psychological distress and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer.Trial registration numberThe trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN1261800172191) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e049704
Author(s):  
Johan H Vlake ◽  
Jasper van Bommel ◽  
Evert-Jan Wils ◽  
Tim Korevaar ◽  
Merel E Hellemons ◽  
...  

IntroductionIntensive care unit (ICU) admission of a relative might lead to psychological distress and complicated grief (post-intensive care syndrome–family; PICS-F). Evidence suggests that increased distress during ICU stay increases risk of PICS-F, resulting in difficulty returning to their normal lives after the ICU experience. Effective interventions to improve PICS-F are currently lacking. In the present trial, we hypothesised that information provision using ICU-specific Virtual Reality for Family members/relatives (ICU-VR-F) may improve understanding of the ICU and subsequently improve psychological well-being and quality of life in relatives of patients admitted to the ICU.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, clustered randomised controlled trial will be conducted from January to December 2021 in the mixed medical-surgical ICUs of four hospitals in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. We aim to include adult relatives of 160 ICU patients with an expected ICU length of stay over 72 hours. Participants will be randomised clustered per patient in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention or control group. Participants allocated to the intervention group will receive ICU-VR-F, an information video that can be watched in VR, while the control group will receive usual care. Initiation of ICU-VR-F will be during their hospital visit unless participants cannot visit the hospital due to COVID-19 regulations, then VR can be watched digitally at home. The primary objective is to study the effect of ICU-VR-F on psychological well-being and quality of life up to 6 months after the patients’ ICU discharge. The secondary outcome is the degree of understanding of ICU treatment and ICU modalities.Ethics and disseminationThe Medical Ethics Committee of the Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, approved the study and local approval was obtained from each participating centre (NL73670.078.20). Our findings will be disseminated by presentation of the results at (inter)national conferences and publication in scientific, peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Register (TrialRegister.nl, NL9220).


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e020433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina E Champion ◽  
Nicola Clare Newton ◽  
Lexine Stapinski ◽  
Maree Teesson

ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of the onlineClimate Schools: Ecstasy and Emerging Drugs moduleover 2 years, and examine the impact of intervention dose on outcomes.DesignCluster randomised controlled trial.SettingSecondary schools in Australia.Participants1126 students (aged 14.9 years) from 11 schools.InterventionFive schools were randomly allocated to the four-lesson internet-basedClimate Schools: Ecstasy and Emerging Drugsmodule. This universal intervention uses cartoon storylines to deliver harm-minimisation information about ecstasy and new psychoactive substances (NPS). It was delivered during health education classes over 4 weeks. Six schools were randomised to the control group (health education as usual). Participants were not blinded to intervention allocation.Outcomes measuresStudents completed self-report surveys at baseline, post-test, 6, 12 and 24 months post-baseline. Intentions to use ecstasy and NPS (including synthetic cannabis and synthetic stimulants), knowledge about ecstasy and NPS and lifetime use of ecstasy and NPS were assessed. This paper reports the results at 24 months post-baseline.AnalysisMixed effects regressions were conducted to analyse intervention effects from baseline to 24 months. Post hoc analyses using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting compared controls with students who: i) completed all four lessons (‘full dose’) and ii) partially completed the intervention (≤three lessons, ‘incomplete dose’).ResultsPrimary analyses found that controls were significantly more likely to intend on using synthetic cannabis compared with intervention group students (OR=3.56, p=0.01). Results from the weighted analyses indicated that controls reported significantly lower knowledge about ecstasy (p=0.001) and NPS (p=0.04) compared with the full-dose group. No significant differences were observed between the incomplete dose and control groups.ConclusionsThe online intervention was effective in modifying students’ intentions to use synthetic cannabis up to 24 months; however, this study highlights the importance of delivering prevention programmes in full to maximise student outcomes.Trial registration numberACTRN12613000708752.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document