Application of Time-by-Time Oral Method for the Colon Disease Patients Who Use Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes Powder (II) Treatment Method in Electronic Colonoscopy
European Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences
Volume 6, Issue 2, April 2020, Pages: 18-21
Received: Mar. 31, 2020;
Accepted: Apr. 17, 2020;
Published: Apr. 30, 2020
Views 395 Downloads 111
Jishi Wu, Digestive Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
Jinglan Luo, Internal Medicine Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
Rui Xi, Digestive Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
Zhaolin Chen, Digestive Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
Objective: To evaluate application of Time - by - time oral method for the colon disease patients who use Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes Powder (II) treatment method in electronic colonoscopy. Methods: 100 patients were invested to join our study from January 2019 to March 2019. They use Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes Powder (II) treatment method in electronic colonoscopy process. They were randomly assigned to control group (n=50) and intervention group (n=50). In intervention group, the participants receive time - by - time oral method when they use PGEP2. The control group participants use the PGEP2 by the usual way. The collected data include patient characteristics, effective cleanliness index, adverse reaction and drug tolerance, those data from our recording. In research process, we use the special questionnaires which is Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Result: The two different group participants have similar patient characteristics and effective cleanliness in study result from patient characteristics research and BBPS. In addition, the intervention group has lower abdominal distension rate than that of control group in result, it is statistical significance [1 (2% vs 17 (34%), p < 0.001]. In addition, the intervention group patients have better drug tolerance, the result is statistical significance [50 (100%) vs 44 (88%), p=0.035]. Conclusion: the time - by - time oral method is good for reduce the rate of adverse reaction, such as nausea and abdominal distension. Additionally, it can improve the drug tolerance, it shows more patients can take medicine on time in the process of using a drug.
Application of Time-by-Time Oral Method for the Colon Disease Patients Who Use Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes Powder (II) Treatment Method in Electronic Colonoscopy, European Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences.
Vol. 6, No. 2,
2020, pp. 18-21.
Tinmouth J, Kennedy EB, Baron D, Burke M, Feinberg S, Gould M, et al. Colonoscopy quality assurance in Ontario: systematic review and clinical practice guideline, Chin. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017; 28 (5): 251–274.
Leung FW. Methods of reducing discomfort during colonoscopy, Dig. Dis. Sci. 2018; 53 (6): 1462–1467.
Sargın M, Uluer MS, Aydogan E, Hanedan BMI, Tepe MA, Eryılmaz EE, et al. Anxiety levels in patients undergoing sedation for elective upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy, Med. Arch. 2016; 70 (2): 112–115.
Yang C, Sriranjan V, Abou-Setta AM, Poluha W, Walker JR, Singh H. Anxiety associated with colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy: a systematic review, Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2018; 113 (12): 1810–1818.
Lee E, Shafer LA, Walker JR, Waldman C, Michaud V, Yang C, et al., Information experiences, needs, and preferences of colonoscopy patients, Medicine (Baltim.) 2019; 98 (20): 15738.
Ueki S, Matsunaka E, Swa T, Ohashi K, Makimoto K. Effectiveness of inhalation of aromatherapy in reducing anxiety in patients before colonoscopy: a systematic review protocol, JBI. Database Syst. Rev. Implement. Rep. 2015; 13 (9): 40–50.
Ovayolu N, Pehlivan S, Pehlivan Y, Buyukhatipoglu HM, Savas MC. Listening to Turkish classical music decreases patients’ anxiety, pain, dissatisfaction and the dose of sedative and analgesic drugs during colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial, World J. Gastroenterol. 2014; 12 (46): 7532–7536.
Strate LL, Ayanian JZ, Kotler G, Syngal S. Risk factors for mortality in lower intestinal bleeding. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018; 6 (9): 1004-1410.
Sengupta N, Tapper EB, Patwardhan VR, Ketwaroo GA, Thaker AM, Leffler DA, et al. Risk factors for adverse outcomes in patients hospitalized with lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Mayo Clin Proc 2015; 90 (8): 1021-1029.
Gralnek IM, Ron-Tal Fisher O, Holub JL, Eisen GM. The role of colonoscopy in evaluating hematochezia: a population-based study in a large consortium of endoscopy practices. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77 (3): 410-418.
Schreuders EH, Ruco A, Rabeneck L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes. Gut 2015; 64: 1637-49.
Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, et al. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-5.
Peery AF, Dellon ES, Lund J, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal disease inthe United States: 2012 update. Gastroenterology 2016; 143: 1179–1187.
Reumkens A, Rondagh EJ, Bakker CM, Winkens B, Masclee AA, Sanduleanu S. Post-colonoscopy complications: a systematic re-view, time trends, and meta-analysis of population-based studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 1092–101.
Ko CW, Dominitz JA. Complications of colonoscopy: magnitude and management. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2017; 20: 659–71.
Jehangir A, Poudel DR, Masand-Rai A, Donato A. A systematic re-view of splenic injuries during colonoscopies: evolving trends in presentation and management. Int J Surg 2016; 33: 55–59.
Salim A, Sangthong B, Martin M, Brown C, Plurad D, Demetriades D. Whole body imaging in blunt multisystem trauma patients without obvious signs of injury: results of a prospective study. Arch Surg 2016; 141: 468–473.