Published online Jan 25, 2016. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i2.113
Peer-review started: June 30, 2015
First decision: July 31, 2015
Revised: August 18, 2015
Accepted: December 13, 2015
Article in press: December 15, 2015
Published online: January 25, 2016
Processing time: 218 Days and 1.1 Hours
AIM: To determine whether observations were reproducible among investigators.
METHODS: From March 2013 through June 2014, 18-85-year-old diagnostic and 50-70-year-old screening patients were enrolled at each center to on-demand sedation colonoscopy with water exchange (WE), water immersion (WI) and insufflation with air or CO2 for insertion and withdrawal [air or carbon dioxide (AICD)]. Data were aggregated for analysis. Primary outcome: Variations in real-time maximum insertion pain (0 = none, 1-2 = discomfort, 10 = worst).
RESULTS: One thousand and ninety-one cases analyzed: WE (n = 371); WI (n = 338); AICD (n = 382). Demographics and indications were comparable. The WE group had the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score, mean (95%CI): WE 2.8 (2.6-3.0), WI 3.8 (3.5-4.1) and AICD 4.4 (4.1-4.7), P < 0.0005. Ninety percent of the colonoscopists were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. One investigator had high insertion pain in all groups, nonetheless WE achieved the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score. WE had the highest proportions of patients with painless unsedated colonoscopy (vs WI, P = 0.013; vs AICD, P < 0.0005); unsedated colonoscopy with only minor discomfort (vs AICD, P < 0.0005), and completion without sedation (vs AICD, P < 0.0005).
CONCLUSION: Aggregate data confirm superiority of WE in lowering colonoscopy real-time maximum insertion pain and need for sedation. Ninety percent of investigators were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. Our results suggest that the technique deserves consideration in a broader scale.
Core tip: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown water exchange (WE) to have considerable advantage in decreasing colonoscopy insertion pain. Assessment of individual investigators’ performance using WE in RCTs is usually not reported. We assessed the performance of individual investigators in 3 RCTs comparing WE, water immersion and gas insufflation (with air or carbon dioxide) during insertion, to determine whether observations are reproducible across investigators and what factors might contribute to variations. Aggregate data show that individual investigators had significant variations in insertion pain scores and use of adjunct maneuvers together with short insertion time, but the pain alleviating impact of WE occurs in 90% of them. WE has the highest proportions of patients with painless unsedated colonoscopy; complete unsedated colonoscopy with only minor discomfort and completion without sedation.
