Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32458286›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2020

A randomized controlled trial comparing right and left lateral decubitus starting position on outcomes in colonoscopy.

Alison Greene, Mark Borgoankar, Kathy Hodgkinson, Chantae Garland, Lisa Bacque, David Pace

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06664762 (Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Colonoscopy, a Multicenter Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06664762 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Colonoscopy, a Multicenter Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Civil de GuadalajaraRan2024 to 2025Enrolled144ConditionsColorectal Cancer ScreeningArmsLeft lateral position intervention, Supine position intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Effects of Positioning During Colonoscopy on Efficacy and Post-procedure Comfort.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

6 authors.

Alison GreeneDepartment of Surgery, Health Sciences Center, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Room H-1373, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St. John's, NL, A1B3V6, Canada.
Mark BorgoankarDepartment of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.
Kathy HodgkinsonFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.
Chantae GarlandFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.
Lisa BacqueDepartment of Surgery, Health Sciences Center, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Room H-1373, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St. John's, NL, A1B3V6, Canada.
David PaceDepartment of Surgery, Health Sciences Center, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Room H-1373, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St. John's, NL, A1B3V6, Canada. dpace@mun.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient positioning in colonoscopy has been proposed as a simple and inexpensive technique to increase luminal distention and improve navigation through the large bowel. We sought to determine if the right lateral (RL) starting position compared to the standard left lateral (LL) starting position could improve outcomes in colonoscopy.

methodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial of 185 patients who were undergoing an elective colonoscopy. Patients were randomized to either a right lateral decubitus starting position or a left lateral decubitus starting position and the primary outcome measure was cecal intubation time. Secondary outcome measures included cecal intubation rate, patient discomfort, and sedation dosage. All colonoscopists who had successfully completed a colonoscopy skills improvement course were included in the trial. A sample size was calculated prior to the start of the study and outcomes were analyzed using univariate and multiple regression analyses.

resultsA total of 94 patients were randomized to RL starting position and 91 patients were randomized to LL starting position. No difference was found in time to cecal intubation comparing the RL starting position (542.6 s, SD 360.7 s) to LL starting position (497.85 s, SD 288.3 s) (p = 0.354). Variables associated with prolonged cecal intubation time included female gender, General Surgery specialty, less than 5 years of endoscopist experience, a high patient discomfort score, amount of water used, and number of position changes required to reach the cecum. There was no difference in any of the secondary outcome measures aside from the amount of midazolam used, with more midazolam used for patients starting in the right lateral decubitus position.

conclusionThis study failed to show an association between cecal intubation time and patient position comparing right and left lateral starting position.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCecumColonoscopyElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansIntubation, GastrointestinalMaleMiddle AgedPatient PositioningCecal intubation timeColonoscopyRight lateralStarting position

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.