NCT02804737

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the GI clinic's currently used web-based instructions at St. Paul's Hospital.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
160

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for all trials

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2014

Shorter than P25 for all trials

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

July 1, 2014

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

September 1, 2014

Completed
8 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

May 11, 2015

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

July 1, 2015

Completed
12 months until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

June 17, 2016

Completed
Last Updated

March 13, 2018

Status Verified

March 1, 2018

Enrollment Period

2 months

First QC Date

May 11, 2015

Last Update Submit

March 12, 2018

Conditions

Colon Cancer

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Effectiveness of Web-based instructions

    Determine the effectiveness of Web-based instructions patients in preparing for colonoscopy by comparing the percentage of patients that achieved an excellent Boston Bowel Preparation Score when following the web-based instructions compared to historical control of paper written instructions.

    Time 0

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • Benefit of web-based instructions

    Time 0

Study Arms (2)

Web Group

Patients given web site (aiddly) instructions for colonoscopy

Device: Aiddly (Web Site)

Paper Group

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

Age19 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodProbability Sample
Study Population

Patients who have been scheduled for a colonoscopy as outpatients

You may qualify if:

  • Patients scheduled for a colonoscopy as outpatients

You may not qualify if:

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

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

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: 17652123BACKGROUND

  • 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: 17611916BACKGROUND

  • 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: 20082216BACKGROUND

  • 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: 12557158BACKGROUND

  • 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: 8247072BACKGROUND

  • 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: 7654107BACKGROUND

  • 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: 12838225BACKGROUND

  • 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: 15758907BACKGROUND

  • 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: 11419832BACKGROUND

  • 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: 12135020BACKGROUND

  • 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: 17269992BACKGROUND

  • 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: 16630226BACKGROUND

  • 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: 24949604BACKGROUND

  • 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: 16336556BACKGROUND

  • 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: 23381511BACKGROUND

  • 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: 23954647BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Colonic Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Colorectal NeoplasmsIntestinal NeoplasmsGastrointestinal NeoplasmsDigestive System NeoplasmsNeoplasms by SiteNeoplasmsDigestive System DiseasesGastrointestinal DiseasesColonic DiseasesIntestinal Diseases

Study Officials

  • Robert Enns, MD

    University of British Columbia

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
COHORT
Time Perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Principal Investigator

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

May 11, 2015

First Posted

June 17, 2016

Study Start

July 1, 2014

Primary Completion

September 1, 2014

Study Completion

July 1, 2015

Last Updated

March 13, 2018

Record last verified: 2018-03

Locations

CA(1)