Smartphone Application Versus Standard Instruction for Colonoscopic Preparation : A Randomized Controlled Trial
Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVE: To compare smartphone application (Colonoscopic Preparation) instructions versus paper instructions for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.
BACKGROUND: Adhering to bowel preparation instructions is important to ensure a high-quality colonoscopy.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included individuals undergoing colonoscopy at a tertiary care hospital. Individuals were randomized (1:1) to receive instructions through a smartphone application or traditional paper instructions. The primary outcome was the quality of the bowel preparation as measured by the Boston Bowel Preparation Score. Secondary outcomes included cecal intubation and polyp detection. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a previously developed questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 238 individuals were randomized (n = 119 in each group), with 202 available for the intention-to-treat analysis (N = 97 in the app group and 105 in the paper group). The groups had similar demographics, indications for colonoscopy, and type of bowel preparation. The primary outcome (Boston Bowel Preparation Score) demonstrated no difference between groups (Colonoscopic Preparation app mean: 7.26 vs paper mean: 7.28, P = 0.91). There was no difference in cecal intubation (P = 0.37), at least one polyp detected (P = 0.43), or the mean number of polyps removed (P = 0.11). A higher proportion strongly agreed or agreed that they would use the smartphone app compared with paper instructions (89.4% vs 70.1%, P = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone instructions performed similarly to traditional paper instructions for those willing to use the application. Local patient preferences need to be considered before making changes in the method of delivery of medical instructions.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical gastroenterology - (2024) vom: 15. März |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Patel, Sunil V [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 15.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status Publisher |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1097/MCG.0000000000001988 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM369791797 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM369791797 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240316233238.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240316s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001988 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1332.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM369791797 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38489496 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Patel, Sunil V |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Smartphone Application Versus Standard Instruction for Colonoscopic Preparation |b A Randomized Controlled Trial |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 15.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status Publisher | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: To compare smartphone application (Colonoscopic Preparation) instructions versus paper instructions for bowel preparation for colonoscopy | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Adhering to bowel preparation instructions is important to ensure a high-quality colonoscopy | ||
| 520 | |a PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included individuals undergoing colonoscopy at a tertiary care hospital. Individuals were randomized (1:1) to receive instructions through a smartphone application or traditional paper instructions. The primary outcome was the quality of the bowel preparation as measured by the Boston Bowel Preparation Score. Secondary outcomes included cecal intubation and polyp detection. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a previously developed questionnaire | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 238 individuals were randomized (n = 119 in each group), with 202 available for the intention-to-treat analysis (N = 97 in the app group and 105 in the paper group). The groups had similar demographics, indications for colonoscopy, and type of bowel preparation. The primary outcome (Boston Bowel Preparation Score) demonstrated no difference between groups (Colonoscopic Preparation app mean: 7.26 vs paper mean: 7.28, P = 0.91). There was no difference in cecal intubation (P = 0.37), at least one polyp detected (P = 0.43), or the mean number of polyps removed (P = 0.11). A higher proportion strongly agreed or agreed that they would use the smartphone app compared with paper instructions (89.4% vs 70.1%, P = 0.001) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone instructions performed similarly to traditional paper instructions for those willing to use the application. Local patient preferences need to be considered before making changes in the method of delivery of medical instructions | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yu, David |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Taylor, Connie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a McKay, Jackie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hookey, Lawrence |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical gastroenterology |d 1980 |g (2024) vom: 15. März |w (DE-627)NLM000468495 |x 1539-2031 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:15 |g month:03 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000001988 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2024 |b 15 |c 03 | ||