Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36028915›Full record

Trial reportTrials2022

The efficacy and tolerability of sports drink versus water in bowel preparations: a randomised controlled study.

Zhixin Zhang, Hui Gao, Xin Yuan, Cenqin Liu, Zhenfei Bao, Siyi Yu, Haofen Xie, Weihong Wang, Jiarong Xie, Lei Xu

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04247386 (The Efficacy and Tolerability of Mizone Versus Water in Bowel Preparations), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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.

NCT04247386 nacompletednot on this map

The Efficacy and Tolerability of Mizone Versus Water in Bowel Preparations: a Randomised Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorNingbo No. 1 HospitalRan2019 to 2020Enrolled270ConditionsBowel PreparationArmsPEG-Mizone, PEG-ELS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhixin ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Hui GaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Xin YuanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Cenqin LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Zhenfei BaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Siyi YuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Haofen XieDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Weihong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China.
Jiarong XieDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China. cheryl.xiejiarong@gmail.com.
Lei XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo, 315010, China. xulei22@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6017-3745
Ningbo First Hospital · CNNingbo University · CN

Funding

the Medical Health Science and Technology Project of Zhejiang Provincial Health Commission 2017KY581the Medical Health Science and Technology Project of Zhejiang Provincial Health Commission No. 2016KYB257the Medical Health Science and Technology Project of Zhejiang Provincial Health Commission No. 2019KY566
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn optimal bowel preparation can result in an improved colonoscopy. This study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the use of a sports drink (Mizone) plus polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution with a water plus PEG solution in bowel preparations.

methodsThis was a randomised controlled study. All of the included patients were randomly divided into the following two groups: the PEG + Mizone group and the PEG + water group. The palatability of the solution was measured through the use of questionnaires. Additionally, bowel cleanliness was evaluated according to the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS, 0-14, with higher values indicating worse cleanliness), as well as with the aid of colonoscopy videos.

resultsA total of 270 patients were enrolled. The rate of adequate bowel preparation was 74.8% in the PEG + Mizone group and 68.9% in the PEG + water group, with a risk difference of 5.9% (95% CI: - 4.8-16.6%), which indicated noninferiority (noninferiority margin: - 9.5% <  - 4.8%). However, patients rated the palatability (65.9% vs 44.4%, P < 0.001) and willingness to recommend or repeat (88.9% vs 75.6%, P = 0.004) the administration of the PEG + Mizone preparation as being better than those of the PEG + water preparation. The rates of adverse events during the bowel preparations were not significantly different between the two groups, except for bloating (PEG + Mizone vs PEG + water, 4.4% vs 13.3%, P = 0.010).

conclusionThe concomitant use of PEG + Mizone was a well tolerated and effective bowel preparation, compared with the PEG + water treatment.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04247386 . Registered on 30 Jan 2020.

Indexed as

CatharticsColonoscopyHumansPolyethylene GlycolsResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesCatharticsPolyethylene GlycolsBowel preparationColonoscopyMizonePolyethylene glycolTolerability

Identifiers

PMID36028915
PMCPMC9419325
OpenAlexW4293176502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.