Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 4/2023

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.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:1–8.CrossRefPubMed Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:1–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1095–1105.CrossRefPubMed Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1095–1105.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Løberg M, Kalager M, Holme Ø et al. Long-Term Colorectal-Cancer Mortality after Adenoma Removal. N Engl J Med 2014;371:799–807.CrossRefPubMed Løberg M, Kalager M, Holme Ø et al. Long-Term Colorectal-Cancer Mortality after Adenoma Removal. N Engl J Med 2014;371:799–807.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D et al. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3). Gut 2013;62:236–241.CrossRefPubMed Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D et al. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3). Gut 2013;62:236–241.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ et al. 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;61:378–384.CrossRefPubMed Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ et al. 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;61:378–384.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;58:76–79.CrossRefPubMed Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;58:76–79.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Sherer EA, Imler TD, Imperiale TF. The effect of colonoscopy preparation quality on adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:545–553.CrossRefPubMed Sherer EA, Imler TD, Imperiale TF. The effect of colonoscopy preparation quality on adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:545–553.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR et al. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1696–1700.CrossRefPubMed Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR et al. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1696–1700.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Lebwohl B, Kastrinos F, Glick M et al. The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;73:1207–1214.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lebwohl B, Kastrinos F, Glick M et al. The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;73:1207–1214.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Johnson DA, Barkun AN, Cohen LB et al. Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the U.S. multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2014;80:543–562.CrossRefPubMed Johnson DA, Barkun AN, Cohen LB et al. Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the U.S. multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2014;80:543–562.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2017;49:378–397.CrossRefPubMed Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2017;49:378–397.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Parmar R, Martel M, Rostom A et al. Validated Scales for Colon Cleansing: A Systematic Review. Am J Gastroenterol 2016;111:197–204.CrossRefPubMed Parmar R, Martel M, Rostom A et al. Validated Scales for Colon Cleansing: A Systematic Review. Am J Gastroenterol 2016;111:197–204.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference DeMicco MP, Clayton LB, Pilot J et al. Novel 1 L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation NER1006 for overall and right-sided colon cleansing: a randomized controlled phase 3 trial versus trisulfate. Gastrointest Endosc 2018;87:e673.CrossRef DeMicco MP, Clayton LB, Pilot J et al. Novel 1 L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation NER1006 for overall and right-sided colon cleansing: a randomized controlled phase 3 trial versus trisulfate. Gastrointest Endosc 2018;87:e673.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Schreiber S, Baumgart DC, Drenth JPH et al. Colon cleansing efficacy and safety with 1 L NER1006 versus sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate: a randomized phase 3 trial. Endoscopy 2019;51:73–84.CrossRefPubMed Schreiber S, Baumgart DC, Drenth JPH et al. Colon cleansing efficacy and safety with 1 L NER1006 versus sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate: a randomized phase 3 trial. Endoscopy 2019;51:73–84.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Bisschops R, Manning J, Clayton LB et al. Colon cleansing efficacy and safety with 1 L NER1006 versus 2 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbate: a randomized phase 3 trial. Endoscopy 2019;51:60–72.CrossRefPubMed Bisschops R, Manning J, Clayton LB et al. Colon cleansing efficacy and safety with 1 L NER1006 versus 2 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbate: a randomized phase 3 trial. Endoscopy 2019;51:60–72.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Feagan BG, Sandborn WJ, D’Haens G et al. The role of centralized reading of endoscopy in a randomized controlled trial of mesalamine for ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2013;145:e142.CrossRef Feagan BG, Sandborn WJ, D’Haens G et al. The role of centralized reading of endoscopy in a randomized controlled trial of mesalamine for ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2013;145:e142.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Division of Gastroenterology and Inborn Errors Products Bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: efficacy and safety considerations for developing new products guidance for industry. City: U.S. Food and Drug Administration; 2021. Division of Gastroenterology and Inborn Errors Products Bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: efficacy and safety considerations for developing new products guidance for industry. City: U.S. Food and Drug Administration; 2021.
19.
go back to reference Fitch K, Bernstein S, Aguilar M, et al The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User’s Manual. City: RAND Corporation; 2001. Fitch K, Bernstein S, Aguilar M, et al The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User’s Manual. City: RAND Corporation; 2001.
20.
go back to reference Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:620–625.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:620–625.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Gerard DP, Foster DB, Raiser MW et al. Validation of a new bowel preparation scale for measuring colon cleansing for colonoscopy: the chicago bowel preparation scale. Clinical and translational gastroenterology 2013;4:e43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gerard DP, Foster DB, Raiser MW et al. Validation of a new bowel preparation scale for measuring colon cleansing for colonoscopy: the chicago bowel preparation scale. Clinical and translational gastroenterology 2013;4:e43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Halphen M, Heresbach D, Gruss HJ et al. Validation of the Harefield Cleansing Scale: a tool for the evaluation of bowel cleansing quality in both research and clinical practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2013;78:121–131.CrossRefPubMed Halphen M, Heresbach D, Gruss HJ et al. Validation of the Harefield Cleansing Scale: a tool for the evaluation of bowel cleansing quality in both research and clinical practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2013;78:121–131.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:482–486.CrossRefPubMed Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:482–486.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH et al. A novel tableted purgative for colonoscopic preparation: efficacy and safety comparisons with Colyte and Fleet Phospho-Soda. Gastrointest Endosc 2000;52:346–352.CrossRefPubMed Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH et al. A novel tableted purgative for colonoscopic preparation: efficacy and safety comparisons with Colyte and Fleet Phospho-Soda. Gastrointest Endosc 2000;52:346–352.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing [abstract]. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:2667. Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing [abstract]. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:2667.
26.
go back to reference Fleiss JL, Cohen J. Equivalence of weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas 1973;33:613–619.CrossRef Fleiss JL, Cohen J. Equivalence of weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas 1973;33:613–619.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Gilder K, Ting N, Tian LL et al. Confidence intervals on intraclass correlation coefficients in a balanced two-factor random design. J Stat Plan Infer 2007;137:1199–1212.CrossRef Gilder K, Ting N, Tian LL et al. Confidence intervals on intraclass correlation coefficients in a balanced two-factor random design. J Stat Plan Infer 2007;137:1199–1212.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–174.CrossRefPubMed Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–174.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Zou GY. Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Statistics in Medicine 2012;31:3972–3981.CrossRefPubMed Zou GY. Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Statistics in Medicine 2012;31:3972–3981.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Cohen J, Grunwald D, Grossberg LB et al. The Effect of Right Colon Retroflexion on Adenoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2016;51:818–824.CrossRef Cohen J, Grunwald D, Grossberg LB et al. The Effect of Right Colon Retroflexion on Adenoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2016;51:818–824.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Tang S, Dong X, Liu W et al. Compare risk factors associated with postoperative infectious complication in Crohn’s disease with and without preoperative infliximab therapy: a cohort study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2020;35:727–737.CrossRefPubMed Tang S, Dong X, Liu W et al. Compare risk factors associated with postoperative infectious complication in Crohn’s disease with and without preoperative infliximab therapy: a cohort study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2020;35:727–737.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Rodrigues-Pinto E, Ferreira-Silva J, Macedo G et al. (Technically) Difficult colonoscope insertion—Tips and tricks. Dig Endosc 2019;31:583–587.CrossRefPubMed Rodrigues-Pinto E, Ferreira-Silva J, Macedo G et al. (Technically) Difficult colonoscope insertion—Tips and tricks. Dig Endosc 2019;31:583–587.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
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
Publication date
20-10-2022
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Issue 4/2023
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-022-07729-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2023

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 4/2023 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.