Clinical trial NCT02466724: Study on the Impact of Education Website on the Quality of Outpatient Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy
Official title: Randomized Prospective Study on the Impact of the Patient Education Website on the Quality of Outpatient Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Colon Cancer
Lead sponsor: University of British Columbia
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2015-06-09
Enrollment: 900
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 19
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

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.

Detailed description: This study is a prospective randomized trial. Four hundred and fifty consecutive eligible patients will be randomized to ideally have two hundred and twenty five patients in each arm. Those who will have traditional paper based instructions and those who will be using an online system. Both groups will receive their instructions by the research assistant prior to leaving the office after being consented. The paper based instructions will be given as a handout and those in the online group will receive their bowel preparation instructions via an email sent by a scheduling assistant

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* 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.

Exclusion Criteria:

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

Primary outcomes:
measure: Patients with Excelent Colonoscopy preparation
timeFrame: Baseline
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Benefit and satisfaction to patients of this method of patient education.
timeFrame: Baseline
measure: Bowel preparation tolerability with this method of patient education.
timeFrame: Baseline
measure: Use of web-based educational platform
timeFrame: Baseline
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Vancouver
country: Canada
facility: St. Paul's Hospital
state: British Columbia
Study officials:
affiliation: University of British Columbia
name: Robert Enns, MD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.