Volume 19, Issue 9 (December 2021)                   Nursing and Midwifery Journal 2021, 19(9): 733-742 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Amirarsalani J, Alilu L, Hemmati Maslak Pak M, Rasouli J. EVALUATING THE QUALITY OF BOWEL PREPARATION AND EXAMINING THE REASONS BEHIND THE REFERRALS OF COLONOSCOPY-CANDIDATE PATIENTS TO THE COLONOSCOPY UNIT OF IMAM KHOMEINI HOSPITAL IN URMIA. Nursing and Midwifery Journal 2021; 19 (9) :733-742
URL: http://unmf.umsu.ac.ir/article-1-4382-en.html
1- MSc in Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, PhD in Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran (Corresponding Author) , Aliluleyla@gmail.com
3- Associate Professor, PhD in Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
4- Assistant Professor of Epidemiology, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
Abstract:   (1576 Views)
Background & Aims: Colonoscopy is performed in order to examine the gastrointestinal tract. It can be used to evaluate the patients who suffer from certain medical conditions including chronic diarrhea of unknown etiology, occult bleeding, and anemia. The first essential step in performing an effective colonoscopy is adequate bowel preparation. Materials & Methods: The present study was a descriptive cross-sectional study that involved 180 patients who underwent colonoscopy and were referred to the colonoscopy unit of Imam Khomeini Hospital in Urmia. It was conducted in a three-month period of time. The samples of the study were selected randomly. The demographic information questionnaire and the Boston preparation scale were used to collect the data. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 software. Results: The quality of the patients’ bowel preparation was assessed based on the Boston bowel preparation scale. The obtained results showed that 26.1% of the subjects had inadequate bowel preparation. Moreover, based on the results of the study, the lowest frequency of referral to hospital for colonoscopy was related to the weight loss. On the other hand, the highest frequency of these referrals was related to positive occult blood test. Furthermore, the analysis of the results showed that the mean bowel preparation score in all of the samples was 6.4 with a standard deviation of 2.61. Finally, the left colon had the highest mean preparation score (2.33) and the right colon had the lowest mean preparation score (1.86). Conclusion: According to the findings of this study, it can be concluded that bowel preparation is affected by various factors that influence the quality and the results of colonoscopy, cause misdiagnosis, and increase the treatment costs for the patients and health system. Therefore, considering the importance of the issue, educating patients, and using up-to-date knowledge about the patients’ bowel preparation can play an important role in the provision of solutions to these problems.  
Full-Text [PDF 543 kb]   (549 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review article | Subject: پرستاری

References
1. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Davidson KW, Epling JW, García FA, et al. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Jama.2016;315(23):2564-75. [DOI:10.1001/jama.2016.5989] [PMID]
2. Hinkie JL, Cheever KH. Brunner & Suddarth,s textbook of medical - surgical nursing. 14th ed. Tehran: Andeshe-Rafe; 2018. [URL]
3. Ngu WS, Rees C. Can technology increase adenoma detection rate? Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2018;11:1756283X17746311. [DOI:10.1177/1756283X17746311] [PMID] [PMCID]
4. Hassan C, East J, Radaelli F, Spada C, Benamouzig R, Bisschops R, et al. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline-update 2019. Endoscopy 2019;51(08):775-94. [DOI:10.1055/a-0959-0505] [PMID]
5. Ewing I, Hurley JJ, Josephides E, Millar A. The molecular genetics of colorectal cancer. Frontline Gastroenterol 2014;5(1):26-30. [DOI:10.1136/flgastro-2013-100329] [PMID] [PMCID]
6. Tenesa A, Farrington SM, Prendergast JG, Porteous ME, Walker M, Haq N, et al. Genome-wide association scan identifies a colorectal cancer susceptibility locus on 11q23 and replicates risk loci at 8q24 and 18q21. Nat Genet 2008;40(5):631-7. [DOI:10.1038/ng.133] [PMID] [PMCID]
7. Wang Y-P, Zhang J, Zhu H-Y, Qian C-L, Liu H, Ji F, et al. Common variation rs6983267 at 8q24. 1 and risk of colorectal adenoma and cancer: evidence based on 31 studies. Tumour Biol 2014;35(5):4067-75. [DOI:10.1007/s13277-013-1532-2] [PMID]
8. Saltzman JR, Cash BD, Pasha SF, Early DS, Muthusamy VR, Khashab MA, et al. Bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;81(4):781-94. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.048] [PMID]
9. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fedewa SA, Ahnen DJ, Meester RG, Barzi A, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67(3):177-93. [DOI:10.3322/caac.21395] [PMID]
10. Sipe BW, Fischer M, Baluyut AR, Bishop RH, Born LJ, Daugherty DF, et al. A low-residue diet improved patient satisfaction with split-dose oral sulfate solution without impairing colonic preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 2013;77(6):932-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2013.01.046] [PMID]
11. Mahmood S, Farooqui SM, Madhoun MF. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;30(8):819-26. [DOI:10.1097/MEG.0000000000001175] [PMID]
12. Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH, Fanelli RD, Hyman N, Shen B, et al. A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a task force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49(6):792-809. [DOI:10.1007/s10350-006-0536-z] [PMID]
13. Seo EH, Kim TO, Park MJ, Joo HR, Heo NY, Park J, et al. Optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy interval in split-dose PEG bowel preparation determines satisfactory bowel preparation quality: an observational prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75(3):583-90. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.029] [PMID]
14. Cheng C-L, Liu N-J, Tang J-H, Kuo Y-L, Hung H-L, Tsui Y-N, et al. Predictors of suboptimal bowel preparation using 3-l of polyethylene glycol for an outpatient colonoscopy: a prospective observational study. Dig Dis Sci 2017;62(2):345-51. [DOI:10.1007/s10620-016-4343-7] [PMID]
15. Fujiki H, Watanabe T, Sueoka E, Rawangkan A, Suganuma M. Cancer prevention with green tea and its principal constituent, EGCG: From early investigations to current focus on human cancer stem cells. Mol Cells 2018;41(2):73. [DOI] [PMCID]
16. Hillyer GC, Basch CH, Lebwohl B, Basch CE, Kastrinos F, Insel BJ, et al. Shortened surveillance intervals following suboptimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy: results of a national survey. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013;28(1):73-81. [DOI:10.1007/s00384-012-1559-7] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Bechtold ML, Mir F, Puli SR, Nguyen DL. Optimizing bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a guide to enhance quality of visualization. Ann Gastroenterol 2016;29(2):137. [DOI:10.20524/aog.2016.0005] [PMID] [PMCID]
18. Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69(3):620-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Alvarez-Gonzalez MA, Pantaleon MA, Flores-Le Roux JA, Zaffalon D, Amorós J, Bessa X, et al. Randomized clinical trial: a normocaloric low-fiber diet the day before colonoscopy is the most effective approach to bowel preparation in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 2019;62(4):491. [DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000001305] [PMID] [PMCID]
20. Li Y, Jia X, Liu B, Qi Y, Zhang X, Ji R, et al. Randomized controlled trial: Standard versus supplemental bowel preparation in patients with Bristol stool form 1 and 2. PloS one 2017;12(2):e0171563. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0171563] [PMID] [PMCID]
21. Chung YW, Han DS, Park KH, Kim KO, Park CH, Hahn T, et al. Patient factors predictive of inadequate bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol: a prospective study in Korea. J Clin Gastroenterol 2009;43(5):448-52. [DOI:10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181662442] [PMID]
22. Chan W-K, Saravanan A, Manikam J, Goh K-L, Mahadeva S. Appointment waiting times and education level influence the quality of bowel preparation in adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. BMC Gastroenterol 2011;11(1):1-9. [DOI:10.1186/1471-230X-11-86] [PMID] [PMCID]
23. Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J, Pike IM, Adler DG, Fennerty MB, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc2015;81(1):31-53. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.058] [PMID]
24. Hautefeuille G, Lapuelle J, Chaussade S, Ponchon T, Molard BR, Coulom P, et al. Factors related to bowel cleansing failure before colonoscopy: results of the PACOME study. United European Gastroenterol J 2014;2(1):22-9. [DOI:10.1177/2050640613518200] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Bhanthumkomol P, Siramolpiwat S, Vilaichone R-K. Incidence and predictors of inadequate bowel preparation before elective colonoscopy in Thai patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015;15(24):10763-8. [DOI:10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.24.10763] [PMID]
26. Appannagari A, Mangla S, Liao C, Reddy KG, Kupfer SS. Risk factors for inadequate colonoscopy bowel preparations in African Americans and whites at an urban medical center. South Med J 2014;107(4):220. [DOI:10.1097/SMJ.0000000000000087] [PMID] [PMCID]
27. Bor R, Matuz M, Fabian A, Szepes Z, Szanto K, Farkas K, et al. Efficacy, tolerability and safety of split-dose bowel cleansing regimen of magnesium citrate with sodium picosulfate-a phase IV clinical observational study. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2021;113(9):635-42. [DOI:10.17235/reed.2020.7073/2020] [PMID]
28. Shafer L, Walker J, Waldman C, Yang C, Michaud V, Bernstein C, et al. Factors associated with anxiety about colonoscopy: the preparation, the procedure, and the anticipated findings. Dig Dis Sci 2018;63(3):610-8. [DOI:10.1007/s10620-018-4912-z] [PMID]
29. Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M, Bretthauer M, Rees CJ, Dekker E, et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative. Endoscopy 2017;49(04):378-97. [DOI:10.1055/s-0043-103411] [PMID]
30. Oluwagbenga OO, Musah Y, Paul O. Colonoscopy in Ido-Ekiti, Nigeria: A Four-Year Review. Gastroint Hepatol Dig Dis 2020;3(1):1-8. [DOI:10.33425/2639-9334.1043]
31. Baker FA, Mari A, Hosadurg D, Suki M, Ovadia B, Gal O, et al. The impact of colonoscopy indication on polyp detection rate. Ann Gastroenterol 2019;32(3):278. [DOI:10.20524/aog.2019.0374] [PMID] [PMCID]
32. Piñerúa-Gonsálvez JF, Zambrano-Infantino RdC, Baptista A, Sulbaran M, Camaray N. Assessment of tolerance and acceptability between mannitol solution and polyethylene glycol as bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a three-center study. Rev Gastroenterol Peru 2020;40(1):7-12. [DOI:10.47892/rgp.2020.401.1023]
33. Radaelli F, Paggi S, Repici A, Gullotti G, Cesaro P, Rotondano G, et al. Barriers against split-dose bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Gut 2017;66(8):1428-33. [DOI:10.1136/gutjnl-2015-311049] [PMID]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Nursing And Midwifery Journal

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb