The study will compare patient's experience between those taking a standard bowel cleansing regimen with minimal laxative tagging regimen of senna and gastrofin. Additionally comparing any possible reduction in diagnostic accuracy that may ensue from an increased quantity of retained faecal residue.
Bowel cleansing with high dose laxative is the standard bowel preparation prior to whole colon investigations but such regimens are associated with considerable patient discomfort and inconvenience, potentially affecting compliance rates \[1-3\]. Unlike existing whole colon investigations (conventional colonoscopy and barium enema), reduced laxative regimens can be successfully used with VC, with the aim of improving patient experience, whilst maintaining diagnostic accuracy. These regimens utilize faecal tagging; a method of labeling residual faeces and fluid with radiodense liquids, such as iodine or barium based fluids, which are taken orally by the patient. Once faecal residue and fluid is labeled in this way, it can easily be discriminated from true pathology (which remains 'untagged'). We are proposing to compare different bowel preparation regimens, and ascertain patient experience of the different regimes, while monitoring diagnostic accuracy of the 2 different regiments.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
150
The intervention is a bowel cleansing procedure
St Mark's Hospital, North West London Hospitals NHS Trust
London, Middlesex, United Kingdom
Versus standard bowel preparation
Time frame: 1 day (while on regimen + effectivness analysis time)
Patient experience and compliance with reduced laxative tagging versus standard preparation
Time frame: 1 day (while on regimen)
Comparison of per polyp specificity between the two preparation regimens
Time frame: 1 day (analysis time)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.