Dataset Information

Evaluation of the effect of reinforced education on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Fourteen million colonoscopies are performed annually in the United States, with the results dependent on bowel preparation before the procedure. However, suitable preparation is neglected in 20-25% of cases, resulting in increased loss of time, failure to diagnose, procedure repetition, and decreased patient satisfaction. Consequently, the current study was performed to evaluate the effect of reinforced education (RE) on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Methods

This study employed an experimental research method. Participants included 83 patients referred to Ayatollah Taleghani Medical Educational Center for colonoscopy, who were divided into control and intervention groups. The control group received standard education, whereas the intervention group received instruction via media and virtually, and preparation was followed up on the day before the colonoscopy. The research tool was a demographic and satisfaction questionnaire developed by the researcher. Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS software (v. 20).

Results

Eighty-three patients, including 47 men and 36 women with an average age of 49.19 years, participated in the study. Mean (standard deviation) patient satisfaction was 11.78 (4.65) in the intervention group and 9.04 (2.95) in the control group; the independent t-test revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P<0.001).

Conclusions

The study suggests that reinforced education using media and virtual means is effective in the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy.

SUBMITTER: Farid N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10769074 | biostudies-literature | 2024

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of the effect of reinforced education on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

Farid Negin N Sharifian Shakila S Ghafouri Raziyeh R

PloS one 20240105 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Fourteen million colonoscopies are performed annually in the United States, with the results dependent on bowel preparation before the procedure. However, suitable preparation is neglected in 20-25% of cases, resulting in increased loss of time, failure to diagnose, procedure repetition, and decreased patient satisfaction. Consequently, the current study was performed to evaluate the effect of reinforced education (RE) on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy.< ...[more]

PMID: 38180990

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Inadequate bowel preparation (BP) is an unfavorable factor that influence the success of colonoscopy. Although standard education (SE) given to patients are proved useful to avoid inadequate BP. Studies concerning the effects of reinforced education (RE) on the quality of BP were inconsistent. The aim of this updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial was to compare the quality of BP between patients receiving RE in addition to SE and those receiving SE alone. METHODS:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were systemically searched to identify the relevant studies published through April 2019. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate BP. Subgroup analyses were conducted. Secondary outcomes included BP score, adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), insertion time, withdrawal time, adverse events, >80% purgative intake and diet compliance. Dichotomous variables were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were reported as mean difference (MD) with 95%CI. Pooled estimates of OR or MD were calculated using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was accessed by calculating the I2 value. A P value less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS:A total of 18 randomized controlled trails (N = 6536) were included in this meta-analysis. Patients who received RE had a better BP quality than those only receiving SE (OR 2.59, 95%CI: 2.09-3.19; P<0.001). A higher ADR (OR 1.35; 95%CI: 1.06-1.72; P = 0.020) and PDR (OR 1.24, 95%CI: 1.02-1.50; P = 0.030), shorter insertion (MD -0.76; 95%CI: -1.48-(-0.04); P = 0.040) and withdrawal time (MD -0.83; 95%CI: -1.83-(-0.28); P = 0.003), less nausea/vomiting (OR 0.78; 95%CI: 0.64-0.97; P = 0.020) and abdominal distension (OR 0.72; 95%CI: 0.68-0.92; P = 0.020) were achieved in the RE group. More patients had >80% purgative intake (OR 2.17; 95%CI, 1.09-4.32; P = 0.030) and were compliant with diet restriction (OR 2.38; 95%CI: 1.79-3.17; P<0.001) in the RE group. CONCLUSION:RE significantly improved BP quality, increased ADR and PDR, decreased insertion and withdrawal time and adverse events.

Project description:Growth of the foreign-born population in the U.S. has led to increasing numbers of limited-English-proficient (LEP) patients. Innovative medical interpreting strategies, including remote simultaneous medical interpreting (RSMI), have arisen to address the language barrier. This study evaluates the impact of interpreting method on patient satisfaction.1,276 English-, Spanish-, Mandarin-, and Cantonese-speaking patients attending the primary care clinic and emergency department of a large New York City municipal hospital were screened for enrollment in a randomized controlled trial. Language-discordant patients were randomized to RSMI or usual and customary (U&C) interpreting. Patients with language-concordant providers received usual care. Demographic and patient satisfaction questionnaires were administered to all participants.541 patients were language-concordant with their providers and not randomized; 371 were randomized to RSMI, 167 of whom were exposed to RSMI; and 364 were randomized to U&C, 198 of whom were exposed to U&C. Patients randomized to RSMI were more likely than those with U&C to think doctors treated them with respect (RSMI 71%, U&C 64%, p < 0.05), but they did not differ in other measures of physician communication/care. In a linear regression analysis, exposure to RSMI was significantly associated with an increase in overall satisfaction with physician communication/care (beta 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.18, scale 0-1.0). Patients randomized to RSMI were more likely to think the interpreting method protected their privacy (RSMI 51%, U&C 38%, p < 0.05). Patients randomized to either arm of interpretation reported less comprehension and satisfaction than patients in language-concordant encounters.While not a substitute for language-concordant providers, RSMI can improve patient satisfaction and privacy among LEP patients. Implementing RSMI should be considered an important component of a multipronged approach to addressing language barriers in health care.

Project description:AimTo compare magnetic imaging-assisted colonoscopy (MIC) with conventional colonoscopy (CC).MethodsMagnetic imaging technology provides a computer-generated image of the shape and position of the colonoscope onto a monitor to give visual guidance to the endoscopist. It is designed to improve colonoscopy performance and tolerability for patients by enabling visualization of loop formation and endoscope position. Recently, a new version of MIC technology was developed for which there are limited data.To evaluate this latest generation of MIC among experienced rather than inexperienced or trainee endoscopists, a prospective randomized trial was performed using only gastroenterologists with therapeutic endoscopy training. Consecutive patients undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to MIC or CC, with patients blinded to their group assignment. Endoscopic procedural metrics and quantities of conscious sedation medications were recorded during the procedures. The procedure was classified as "usual" or "difficult" by the endoscopist at the conclusion of each case based on the need for adjunctive maneuvers to facilitate endoscope advancement. After more than one hour post-procedure, patients completed a 10 cm visual analogue pain scale to reflect the degree of discomfort experienced during their colonoscopy. The primary outcome was patient comfort expressed by the visual analogue pain score. Secondary outcomes consisted of endoscopic procedural metrics as well as a sedation score derived from standardized dose increments of the conscious sedation medications.ResultsTwo hundred fifty-three patients were randomized and underwent MIC or CC between September 2011 and October 2012. The groups were similar in terms of the indications for colonoscopy and patient characteristics. There were no differences in cecal intubation rates (100% vs 99%), insertion distance-to-cecum (82 cm vs 83 cm), time-to-cecum (6.5 min vs 7.2 min), or polyp detection rate (47% vs 52%) between the MIC and CC groups. The primary outcome of mean pain score (1.0 vs 0.9 out of 10, P = 0.41) did not differ between MIC and CC groups, nor did the mean sedation score (8.2 vs 8.5, P = 0.34). Within the subgroup of cases considered more challenging or difficult, time-to-cecum was significantly faster with MIC compared to CC, 10.1 min vs 13.4 min respectively (P = 0.01). Sensitivity analyses confirmed a similar pattern of overall findings when each endoscopist was considered separately, demonstrating that the mean results for the entire group were not unduly influenced by outlier results from any one endoscopist.ConclusionAlthough the latest version of MIC resulted in faster times-to-cecum within a subgroup of more challenging cases, overall it was no better than CC in terms of patient comfort, sedation requirements and endoscopic procedural metrics, when performed in experienced hands.

Project description:AimTo study the significance of cap-fitted colonoscopy in improving cecal intubation time and polyp detection rate.MethodsThis study was a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted from March 2008 to February 2009 in a tertiary referral hospital at Sydney. The primary end point was cecal intubation time and the secondary endpoint was polyp detection rate. Consecutive cases of total colonoscopy over a 1-year period were recruited. Randomization into either standard colonoscopy (SC) or cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) was performed after consent was obtained. For cases randomized to CAC, one of the three sizes of cap was used: D-201-15004 (with a diameter of 15.3 mm), D-201-14304 (14.6 mm) and D-201-12704 (13.0 mm). All of these caps were produced by Olympus Medical Systems, Japan. Independent predictors for faster cecal time and better polyp detection rate were also determined from this study.ResultsThere were 200 cases in each group. There was no significant difference in terms of demographic characteristics between the two groups. CAC, when compared to the SC group, had no significant difference in terms of cecal intubation rate (96.0% vs 97.0%, P = 0.40) and time (9.94 +/- 7.05 min vs 10.34 +/- 6.82 min, P = 0.21), or polyp detection rate (32.8% vs 31.3%, P = 0.75). On the subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference in terms of cecal intubation time by trainees (88.1% vs 84.8%, P = 0.40), ileal intubation rate (82.5% vs 79.0%, P = 0.38) or total colonoscopy time (23.24 +/- 13.95 min vs 22.56 +/- 9.94 min, P = 0.88). On multivariate analysis, the independent determinants of faster cecal time were consultant-performed procedures (P < 0.001), male patients (P < 0.001), non-usage of hyoscine (P < 0.001) and better bowel preparation (P = 0.01). The determinants of better polyp detection rate were older age (P < 0.001), no history of previous abdominal surgery (P = 0.04), patients not having esophagogastroduodenoscopy in the same setting (P = 0.003), trainee-performed procedures (P = 0.01), usage of hyoscine (P = 0.01) and procedures performed for polyp follow-up (P = 0.01). The limitations of the study were that it was a single-center experience, no blinding was possible, and there were a large number of endoscopists.ConclusionCAC did not significantly different from SC in term of cecal intubation time and polyp detection rate.

Project description:ObjectivesThe epilepsy treatment gap is largest in resource-poor countries. We evaluated the efficacy of a 1-day health education program in a rural area of Kenya. The primary outcome was adherence to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) as measured by drug levels in the blood, and the secondary outcomes were seizure frequency and Kilifi Epilepsy Beliefs and Attitudes Scores (KEBAS).MethodsSeven hundred thirty-eight people with epilepsy (PWE) and their designated supporter were randomized to either the intervention (education) or nonintervention group. Data were collected at baseline and 1 year after the education intervention was administered to the intervention group. There were 581 PWE assessed at both time points. At the end of the study, 105 PWE from the intervention group and 86 from the nonintervention group gave blood samples, which were assayed for the most commonly used AEDs (phenobarbital, phenytoin, and carbamazepine). The proportions of PWE with detectable AED levels were determined using a standard blood assay method. The laboratory technicians conducting the assays were blinded to the randomization. Secondary outcomes were evaluated using questionnaires administered by trained field staff. Modified Poisson regression was used to investigate the factors associated with improved adherence (transition from nonoptimal AED level in blood at baseline to optimal levels at follow-up), reduced seizures, and improved KEBAS, which was done as a post hoc analysis. This trial is registered in ISRCTN register under ISRCTN35680481.ResultsThere was no significant difference in adherence to AEDs based on detectable drug levels (odds ratio [OR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.74-2.90, p = 0.28) or by self-reports (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71-1.40, p = 1.00) between the intervention and nonintervention group. The intervention group had significantly fewer beliefs about traditional causes of epilepsy, cultural treatment, and negative stereotypes than the nonintervention group. There was no difference in seizure frequency. A comparison of the baseline and follow-up data showed a significant increase in adherence-intervention group (36-81% [p < 0.001]) and nonintervention group (38-74% [p < 0.001])-using detectable blood levels. The number of patients with less frequent seizures (≤3 seizures in the last 3 months) increased in the intervention group (62-80% [p = 0.002]) and in the nonintervention group (67-75% [p = 0.04]). Improved therapeutic adherence (observed in both groups combined) was positively associated with positive change in beliefs about risks of epilepsy (relative risk [RR] 2.00, 95% CI 1.03-3.95) and having nontraditional religious beliefs (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.01-3.99). Reduced seizure frequency was associated with improved adherence (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.19-2.47). Positive changes in KEBAS were associated with having tertiary education as compared to none (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.14).SignificanceHealth education improves knowledge about epilepsy, but once only contact does not improve adherence. However, sustained education may improve adherence in future studies.

Project description:IntroductionColonoscopy is the reference method in screening and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasm, but its efficacy is closely related to the quality of bowel preparation. Poor patient compliance is a major risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation likely due to poor patient education. Such an education is usually provided via either oral or written instructions by clinicians. However, multiple education methods, such as smartphone applications, have been proved useful in aiding patients through bowel preparation. Also, it was reported that a large proportion of patients feel anxious before colonoscopy. Virtual reality (VR) is a novel method to educate patients and provides them with an immersive experience. Theoretically, it can make patients better prepared for bowel preparation and colonoscopy. However, no prospective studies have assessed the role of this novel technology in patient education before colonoscopy. We hypothesise that VR videos can improve bowel preparation quality and reduce pre-procedure anxiety.Methods/designThe trial is a prospective, randomised, single-blinded, single-centre trial. Outpatients who are scheduled to undergo colonoscopy for screening or diagnostic purposes for the first time will be randomised to receive either the conventional patient education or the conventional methods plus VR videos, and 322 patients will be enrolled from the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. The primary endpoint is the quality of bowel preparation, measured by the Boston bowel preparation score. Secondary endpoints include polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate, patient compliance to complete bowel cleansing, withdrawal time, pre-procedure anxiety, overall satisfaction and willingness for the next colonoscopy.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the institutional review board of the Peking Union Medical College Hospital (No. ZS-1647). The results of this trial will be published in an open-access way and disseminated among gastrointestinal physicians and endoscopists.Trial registration numberNCT03667911.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of the effect of reinforced education on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluation of the effect of reinforced education on the satisfaction of patients undergoing colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets