RESUMO
BACKGROUND: An adequate bowel preparation is an important quality measure for optimal colonoscopy. AIMS: The aim of this article is to study the burden of bowel preparations by examining seven specific variables (hunger, taste, volume, sleep, social, work, and adverse events (AEs)). METHODS: Ambulatory patients undergoing elective colonoscopy completed a questionnaire regarding their experience with the prescribed preparation. The seven study variables were graded using a numerical scale of 0-10 (best to worst). A score >6 was considered to indicate a significant impact and used as primary outcome. Patients were also asked to grade in descending order what they perceived as the worst aspect of the preparation. RESULTS: A total of 216 patients completed the survey. Preparations consisted of split-dose sodium picosulfate (SPS) (n = 49), split-dose 4 l PEG ± menthol (n = 49), full-dose PEG (n = 68), and 2 l split-dose PEG + ascorbic acid (n = 50). Except for work and AEs, all variables were considered to have a negative impact by >20% of patients (range 20.4-34.2). SPS was superior to PEG regimens in taste (4.1% vs. 35.9%) and volume (0% vs. 44.9%) (p < 0.05 for both) but inferior for hunger (30.6% vs. 19.2%; p = 0.09). The addition of menthol to PEG significantly improved taste (22.4% vs. 41.5%; p = 0.02). Sleep disturbances were most common with SPS and least with split-dose PEG (30.6% vs. 17.4%; p < 0.05). Overall, patients ranked volume, taste, and hunger as most burdensome. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of bowel preparation is substantial. An informed personalized choice of preparation may improve adherence, tolerability and colon cleansing.
RESUMO
It is well known that triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori is losing efficacy worldwide. A regimen containing proton pump inhibitor and multiple-dose capsules of bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline has proven efficacy. In addition, a literature review on dosage of previous regimens shows that half-dose clarithromycin-based regimens are equally effective to full-dose regimens. However, the applicability of dose reduction to bismuth-based therapy is unknown. This communication shows that a reduced-dose bismuth-based regimen fails to achieve acceptable eradication rates.