Study on the Impact of Education Website on the Quality of Outpatient Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy

NCT02466724 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: H14-02390
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 900
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common and life threatening condition that will affect one in thirteen individuals. Colonoscopy is the most commonly used procedure to identify colorectal malignancies or precancerous lesions at an earlier stage, which affords an opportunity for cure. However, low level of bowel cleanliness hinders polyp detection and therefore can limit colonoscopy effectiveness. Historically, the majority of the studies have focused on pharmacological factors to optimize bowel preparation quality. Recently, non-pharmacological factors have been found to have significant increases in bowel preparation quality. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of web-based instructions vs. the historical phone/letter instructions given to patients planning to have a colonoscopy.

Conditions

Colon Cancer

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Patients with Excelent Colonoscopy preparation

  To determine the effectiveness of web-based instructions for patients preparing for colonoscopy by comparing the percentage of patients that achieve an excellent Boston Bowel Preparation score when following the web-based instructions compared to the control arm of patients receiving paper written instructions.

  Baseline

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Benefit and satisfaction to patients of this method of patient education.

  Baseline

• Bowel preparation tolerability with this method of patient education.

  Baseline

• Use of web-based educational platform

  Baseline

Study Arms (2)

Web Group

EXPERIMENTAL

Patients given web site (aiddly) instructions for colonoscopy

Device: Aiddly (Web Site)

Paper Group

NO INTERVENTION

Patients given paper instructions for colonoscopy

Interventions

Aiddly (Web Site) DEVICE

A website designed to better educate patients on how to prepare for their colonoscopies

Web Group

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 19 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Age 19 or greater
• Patients scheduled for a colonoscopy using a doctors "normal prep" as outpatients
• Willing to participate by filling out the survey
• Must be able to read and understand English
• Must have ability to use email, have a functioning email account, and are willing to be contacted by email.

You may not qualify if:

• Unable to speak English
• Unwilling to participate in reading online materials

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University of British Columbia: lead

Study Sites (1)

St. Paul's Hospital

Vancouver, British Columbia, V6Z 2K5, Canada

Location

Related Publications (16)

• Rex DK. Dosing considerations in the use of sodium phosphate bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Ann Pharmacother. 2007 Sep;41(9):1466-75. doi: 10.1345/aph.1K206. Epub 2007 Jul 24.

  PMID: 17652123 BACKGROUND

• Park JS, Sohn CI, Hwang SJ, Choi HS, Park JH, Kim HJ, Park DI, Cho YK, Jeon WK, Kim BI. Quality and effect of single dose versus split dose of polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for early-morning colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2007 Jul;39(7):616-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966434.

  PMID: 17611916 BACKGROUND

• Unger RZ, Amstutz SP, Seo DH, Huffman M, Rex DK. Willingness to undergo split-dose bowel preparation for colonoscopy and compliance with split-dose instructions. Dig Dis Sci. 2010 Jul;55(7):2030-4. doi: 10.1007/s10620-009-1092-x. Epub 2010 Jan 16.

  PMID: 20082216 BACKGROUND

• Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, Bond J, Burt R, Ferrucci J, Ganiats T, Levin T, Woolf S, Johnson D, Kirk L, Litin S, Simmang C; Gastrointestinal Consortium Panel. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology. 2003 Feb;124(2):544-60. doi: 10.1053/gast.2003.50044.

  PMID: 12557158 BACKGROUND

• Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O'Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Waye JD, Schapiro M, Bond JH, Panish JF, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec 30;329(27):1977-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199312303292701.

  PMID: 8247072 BACKGROUND

• Muller AD, Sonnenberg A. Protection by endoscopy against death from colorectal cancer. A case-control study among veterans. Arch Intern Med. 1995 Sep 11;155(16):1741-8. doi: 10.1001/archinte.1995.00430160065007.

  PMID: 7654107 BACKGROUND

• Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Jul;58(1):76-9. doi: 10.1067/mge.2003.294.

  PMID: 12838225 BACKGROUND

• Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Mar;61(3):378-84. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02776-2.

  PMID: 15758907 BACKGROUND

• Ness RM, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Jun;96(6):1797-802. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.03874.x.

  PMID: 11419832 BACKGROUND

• Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR, Bratcher LL. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jul;97(7):1696-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05827.x.

  PMID: 12135020 BACKGROUND

• Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbach D. Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Feb 15;25(4):373-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03212.x.

  PMID: 17269992 BACKGROUND

• Tan JJ, Tjandra JJ. Which is the optimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy - a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2006 May;8(4):247-58. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.00970.x.

  PMID: 16630226 BACKGROUND

• Holt EW, Yimam KK, Ma H, Shaw RE, Sundberg RA, Verhille MS. Patient tolerability of bowel preparation is associated with polyp detection rate during colonoscopy. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014 Jun;23(2):135-40. doi: 10.15403/jgld.2014.1121.232.ewh1.

  PMID: 24949604 BACKGROUND

• Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv Res. 2005 Dec;40(6 Pt 1):1918-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00438.x.

  PMID: 16336556 BACKGROUND

• Hibbard JH, Greene J. What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):207-14. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1061.

  PMID: 23381511 BACKGROUND

• Serper M, Gawron AJ, Smith SG, Pandit AA, Dahlke AR, Bojarski EA, Keswani RN, Wolf MS. Patient factors that affect quality of colonoscopy preparation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Mar;12(3):451-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.07.036. Epub 2013 Aug 15.

  PMID: 23954647 BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Colonic Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Colorectal Neoplasms; Intestinal Neoplasms; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Digestive System Neoplasms; Neoplasms by Site; Neoplasms; Digestive System Diseases; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Colonic Diseases; Intestinal Diseases

Study Officials

• Robert Enns, MD

  University of British Columbia

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: CARE PROVIDER
• Purpose: HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Principal Investigator

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: May 13, 2015
• First Posted: June 9, 2015
• Study Start: March 1, 2015
• Primary Completion: May 1, 2016
• Study Completion: June 1, 2017
• Last Updated: October 26, 2017

Record last verified: 2017-10

Locations

CA (1)