ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2013
Factors influencing quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
41 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effectiveness of walking exercise on the bowel preparation before colonoscopy: a single blind randomized clinical trial study.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Shorter waiting times from education to colonoscopy can improve the quality of bowel preparation: A randomized controlled trial.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2018Trial
- Split-dose vs same-day reduced-volume polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution for morning colonoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Trial
- Split dose bowel preparation before colonoscopy of PEG (Nulytely) in comparison to routine single dose bowel preparation.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationTrial
- Article
- Review
- Enhancing Patient Education for Colonoscopy Preparation: Strategies, Tools, and Best Practices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- AN ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD PREDICTION MODEL TO IDENTIFY INADEQUATE BOWEL PREPARATION IN PATIENTS AT OUTPATIENT COLONOSCOPY.Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Article
- Improving adherence towards bowel preparation for colonoscopy.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023Article
- Article
- Efficacy of different bowel preparation regimen volumes for colorectal cancer screening and compliance with European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performance measures.United European gastroenterology journal · 2023Article
- Factors affecting the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in hard-to-prepare patients: Evidence from the literature.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Bowel cleansing efficacy of 1 L NER1006JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022Article
- Effect of the Weekend on Bowel Preparation Quality in Outpatient Colonoscopies.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Article
- Relationship between Health Literacy and Knowledge, Compliance with Bowel Preparation, and Bowel Cleanliness in Older Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Predictive factors of inadequate bowel preparation for elective colonoscopy.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2022Article
- Article
- Safety and efficacy of sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, and citric acid bowel preparation in patients with baseline renal impairment or diabetes: subanalysis of a randomized, controlled trial.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2021Article
- [Post-colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer: Causes and Prevention of Interval Colorectal Cancer].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent technological advances in colonoscopy have led to improvements in both image enhancement and procedural performance. However, the utility of these technological advancements remain dependent on the quality of bowel preparation during colonoscopy. Poor bowel preparation has been shown to be associated with lower quality indicators of colonoscopy performance, such as reduced cecal intubation rates, increased patient discomfort and lower adenoma detection. The most popular bowel preparation regimes currently used are based on either Polyethylene glycol-electrolyte, a non-absorbable solution, or aqueous sodium phosphate, a low-volume hyperosmotic solution. Statements from various international societies and several reviews have suggested that the efficacy of bowel preparation regimes based on both purgatives are similar, although patients' compliance with these regimes may differ somewhat. Many studies have now shown that factors other than the type of bowel preparation regime used, can influence the quality of bowel preparation among adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. These factors can be broadly categorized as either patient-related or procedure-related. Studies from both Asia and the West have identified patient-related factors such as an increased age, male gender, presence of co-morbidity and socio-economic status of patients to be associated with poor bowel preparation among adults undergoing routine out-patient colonoscopy. Additionally, procedure-related factors such as adherence to bowel preparation instructions, timing of bowel purgative administration and appointment waiting times for colonoscopy are recognized to influence the quality of colon cleansing. Knowledge of these factors should aid clinicians in modifying bowel preparation regimes accordingly, such that the quality of colonoscopy performance and delivery of service to patients can be optimised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.