Hui Jia

Delivery of Instructions via Mobile Social Media App Increases Quality of Bowel Preparation

BACKGROUND & AIMS Bowel preparation is closely linked to the quality of colonoscopy. We investigated whether delivery of instructions via a social media app increases the quality of colonoscopy by improving adequacy of bowel preparation. METHODS We performed a prospective study at 3 endoscopic centers in China of 770 colonoscopy outpatients (18-80 years old) with convenient access to Wechat (a widely used mobile social media app) from May through November 2014. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received standard education along with delivery of interactive information via Wechat (n = 387) or standard education (controls, n = 383). The primary outcome was proportion of patients with adequate bowel preparation (Ottawa score <6). Secondary outcomes included rates of adenoma detection and cecal intubation, cecal intubation time, rates of incomplete compliance with instructions, and patient willingness to repeat bowel preparation. RESULTS Demographic features were comparable between the groups. A higher proportion of patients in the group that received social media instruction had adequate bowel preparation than the control group (82.2% vs 69.5%, P < .001). Among patients with successful colonoscopies, the group that received social media instruction had lower mean total and segmental Ottawa scores (P < .05). A higher proportion of patients receiving social media instruction also had cecal intubation (97.2% vs 93.2% in controls, P = .014) and were found to have adenomas (18.6% vs 12.0% in controls, P = .012). CONCLUSIONS Instruction via a mobile social media app, in conjunction with regular instruction, increases subjective measures of adequacy of bowel preparation. Use of the app significantly increased the proportion of patients with successful cecal intubation and in whom adenomas were detected, indicating increased quality of colonoscopy. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02140827.

Water Exchange Method Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objectives:Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key colonoscopy quality indicator in Western clinical literature. Our low ADR prompted us to assess novel methods to improve performance. Western retrospective reports suggested that water exchange (WE) could increase ADR. However, most of these studies used pain score or intubation rate as the primary outcome. Here we test the hypothesis that WE significantly increases ADR among Chinese colonoscopists and design a prospective randomized controlled trial using ADR as our primary outcome.Methods:This prospective, randomized controlled trial was performed at six centers in China. Screening, surveillance, and diagnostic cases were randomized to be examined by WE or traditional air insufflation (AI) method. The primary outcome was ADR.Results:From April 2014 to July 2015, 3,303 patients were randomized to WE (n=1,653) and AI (n=1,650). The baseline characteristics were comparable. Overall ADR was 18.3% (WE) and 13.4% (AI) (relative risk 1.45, 95% confidential interval: 1.20–1.75, P<0.001). ADR in screening patients using AI was 25.8% (male) and 15.7% (female). ADR in screening patients aged >50 years old was 29.4% (WE) and 22.9% (AI) (relative risk 1.09, 95% confidential interval: 1.00–1.19, P=0.040). The increase by WE was reproducibly observed in all indication categories, and significant in screening and diagnostic cases. The limitation imposed by the unblinded investigators was mitigated by comparable inspection times in cases without polyps, similar adenoma per positive colonoscopy, and reproducible enhancement of ADR and adenoma per colonoscopy by WE across all eight investigators.Conclusions:This prospective study confirms Western retrospective data that WE significantly improves ADR among Chinese colonoscopists. WE may be superior to AI for screening colonoscopy in China. Colonoscopists elsewhere with low ADR might consider evaluating WE for performance improvement.

Same-Day Single Dose of 2 Liter Polyethylene Glycol is Not Inferior to The Standard Bowel Preparation Regimen in Low-Risk Patients: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Objectives:Split dose of 4 l polyethylene glycol (PEG) is currently the standard regimen for bowel preparation (BP). However, it may be unnecessary for patients without high risks (e.g., old age, constipation, and diabetes, and so on) for inadequate BP. The study aimed to compare the efficacy of bowel cleansing between low-risk patients receiving same-day, single dose of low-volume (SSL) PEG vs. standard regimen.Methods:This prospective, randomized, observer-blinded, non-inferiority study enrolled low-risk patients in three centers. Patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized (1:1) to the SSL or standard group. The primary outcome was adequate BP, defined by Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) ≥6 and each segmental score ≥2. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, cecal intubation rate, and patient willingness to repeat BP, and so on.Results:Among 2,532 patients eligible for the study, 940 (37.1%) were at low risk and 792 (31.3%) at high risk for inadequate BP. The low-risk patients were randomly allocated to the SSL (n=470) or standard group (n=470). The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that adequate BP was achieved in 88.1% in the SSL group and 87.0% in the standard group (relative risk (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75–1.63, P=0.621). The overall BBPS was 7.3±1.2 and 7.3±1.3, respectively (P=0.948). No significant differences were found between the two groups with regards to the right, transverse, and left-segmental colon BBPS (all P>0.05). However, in terms of adverse events, patients in the SSL group reported less nausea (19.6% vs. 29.9%), vomiting (5.3% vs. 11.4%), and abdominal discomfort (2.2% vs. 6.0%) compared with those in the standard group. More patients in the SSL group were willing to repeat BP (94.0% vs. 89.5%, P=0.015).Conclusions:For low-risk patients, the SSL regimen was not inferior to the split dose of 4 l PEG for adequacy of BP. Single dose of low-volume regimen had significantly fewer adverse events. This simplified regimen may be preferable in the “easy-to prepare” population.

Air Insufflation May Still be Ideal for Adenoma Detection

To the Editor: I read the article by Jia et al. ( 1 ) with great interest. I commend you for trying to clarify an important topic in endoscopy regarding water exchange (WE) vs. air insuffl ation (AI) to optimize adenoma detection rate (ADR) ( 1 ). However, I have concerns regarding the study’s generalizability. While the cecal intubation rate is at current quality standards, the baseline ADR is below current accepted quality standards ( 2 ). Current guidelines recommend a baseline ADR of ≥25% of average risk screening colonoscopies with ≥30% in males and ≥20% in females ( 2 ). In this study by Jia et al. , the overall ADR was 18.3% in the WE and 13.4% in the AI group ( 1 ). Additionally, when subcategorized by gender, ADR in WE males was 21.2% and AI was 15.8%; and ADR in WE females was 15.1% and AI was 10.8%, all well below the quality standards for both males and females ( 1,2 ). While the study clearly shows a signifi cant increase in ADR using the WE method, it is unclear why the baseline ADR is below accepted standards ( 1,2 ). Interestingly, even aft er the improvement, only the WE group achieved an ADR greater than the standard recommendation of ≥25% ( 1,2 ). While the fi ndings of this study are interesting, it is concerning that the baseline ADR is substantially below current quality accepted standards for high-quality colonoscopy. Th e reasons for this substandard ADR is not clear from the study. While WE does appear to increase ADR for polyps <10 mm, the ability to generalize these fi ndings to practices who already achieve an ADR at current standards of ≥25% is unclear.

Activities in a social networking-based discussion group by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography doctors

Background Online social networking is increasingly being used among medical practitioners. However, few studies have evaluated its use in therapeutic endoscopy. Here, we aimed to analyze the shared topics and activities of a group of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) doctors in a social networking-based endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography discussion group (EDG). Materials and methods Six ERCP trainers working in Xijing Hospital and 48 graduated endoscopists who had finished ERCP training in the same hospital were invited to join in EDG. All group members were informed not to divulge any private information of patients when using EDG. The activities of group members on EDG were retrospectively extracted. The individual data of the graduated endoscopists were collected by a questionnaire. Results From June 2014 to May 2015, 6924 messages were posted on EDG, half of which were ERCP related. In total, 214 ERCP-related topics were shared, which could be categorized into three types: sharing experience/cases (52.3%), asking questions (38.3%), and sharing literatures/advances (9.3%). Among the 48 graduated endoscopists, 21 had a low case volume of less than 50 per year and 27 had a high volume case volume of 50 or more. High-volume graduated endoscopists posted more ERCP-related messages (P=0.008) and shared more discussion topics (P=0.003) compared with low-volume graduated endoscopists. A survey showed that EDG was useful for graduated endoscopists in ERCP performance and management of post-ERCP complications, etc. Conclusion A wide range of ERCP-related topics were shared on the social networking-based EDG. The ERCP-related behaviors on EDG were more active in graduated endoscopists with an ERCP case volume of more than 50 per year.