Published in:
20-10-2022 | Original Article
Existing Bowel Preparation Quality Scales Are Reliable in the Setting of Centralized Endoscopy Reading
Authors:
Jurij Hanzel, Michael Sey, Christopher Ma, Guangyong Zou, James E. East, Corey A. Siegel, Mahmoud Mosli, Walter Reinisch, John W. D. McDonald, Mark S. Silverberg, Tanja Van Viegen, Lisa M. Shackelton, Lucy B. Clayton, Robert Enns, Ian Epstein, Robert J. Hilsden, Lawrence Hookey, Dana C. Moffatt, Richard Ng Kwet Shing, Jennifer J. Telford, Daniel von Renteln, Brian G. Feagan, Alan Barkun, Vipul Jairath
Published in:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
|
Issue 4/2023
Login to get access
Abstract
Background
Development of bowel preparation products has been based upon colon cleansing rating by a local endoscopist. It is unclear how bowel preparation scales perform when centrally evaluated.
Aims
To evaluate the reliability of bowel preparation quality scales when assessed by central readers.
Methods
Four central readers evaluated 52 videos in triplicate, 2 weeks apart, during the entire endoscopic procedure (insertion/withdrawal of the colonoscope) and exclusively on colonoscope withdrawal using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), Chicago Bowel Preparation scale, Harefield Cleansing Scale, Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPQS), Aronchick score, a visual analogue scale, and additional items proposed in a modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness process. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients.
Results
Intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence interval) for inter-rater reliability of the quality scales ranged from 0.51 to 0.65 (consistent with moderate to substantial inter-rater reliability) during the entire procedure. Corresponding intraclass correlation coefficients for intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.69 to 0.77 (consistent with substantial intra-rater reliability). Reliability was highest in the right colon and lowest in the left colon. No differences were observed in reliability when assessed for the procedure overall (insertion/withdrawal) relative to assessment on withdrawal alone.
Conclusion
All five bowel preparation quality scales had moderate to substantial inter-rater reliability. Panelists considered the Aronchick score too simplistic for clinical trials and recognized that assessment of residual fluid in the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale was not amenable to central assessment.