Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26504509›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2015

Unsedation colonoscopy can be not that painful: Evaluation of the effect of "Lamaze method of colonoscopy".

Shao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Modified Lamaze Breathing Reduces Abdominal Pain in Patients during Colonoscopy.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022
    Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Shao-Ping YuShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Xiao-Dong LinShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Guang-Yao WuShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Song-Hu LiShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Zong-Quan WenShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Xiao-Hong CenShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Xian-Guang HuangShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Mei-Ting HuangShao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China.
Dongguan People’s Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate the pain relieving effect of intervention with "Lamaze method of colonoscopy" in the process of colonoscopy.

methodsFive hundred and eighty-five patients underwent colonoscopy were randomly divided into three groups, Lamaze group, anesthetic group and control group. Two hundred and twenty-four patients of Lamaze group, the "Lamaze method of colonoscopy" were practiced in the process of colonoscopy. The Lamaze method of colonoscopy is modified from the Lamaze method of childbirth, which helped patients to relieve pain through effective breathing control. One hundred and seventy-eight patients in anesthetic group accepted sedation colonoscopy. For 183 patients in control group, colonoscopy was performed without any intervention. The satisfactory of colon cleaning, intestinal lesions, intubation time, success ratio, pain grading and complications were recorded. All data were statistically analyzed.

resultsThere were no significant differences at base line of the three groups (P > 0.05). Anesthetic group shows advantage in intubation time than the other two groups (P < 0.05). Lamaze group shows no advantage in intubation time than that in control group (P > 0.05). The anesthetic group showed an apparent advantage in relieving pain (P < 0.01). Therefore, the "Lamaze method of colonoscopy" performed in colonoscopy could relieve pain effectively comparing with control group (P < 0.05). The patients in anesthetic group had the highest incidence of complications (P < 0.05).

conclusionThe performance of the "Lamaze method of colonoscopy" in the process of colonoscopy could relieve patients' pain, minimize the incidence of complications, and is worthy promotion in clinical practice.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyLamaze techniqueNo sedationPain

Identifiers

PMID26504509
PMCPMC4613809
OpenAlexW2416815969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.