Improving Outpatient Colonoscopy Bowel Prep with the Orton Score
NCT ID: NCT04093557
Last Updated: 2024-12-12
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
WITHDRAWN
NA
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-12-06
2024-12-06
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Given that the patient population described above are often not well-known to UVA providers, they may be prescribed prep regimens that are not ideal for their comorbidities. Not infrequently, these patients show up to their colonoscopies with an inadequate bowel prep, leading to either cancelled or incomplete procedures, increased healthcare and personal financial costs (such as missed wages from taking off work), suboptimal endoscopy resource utilization, and delay in or missed polyp (or potentially cancer) detection.
The investigators seek to use a novel scoring system designed to predict patients at risk for suboptimal preps (and hence patients that would benefit from an extended prep) and apply it in uniform fashion to a patient population most at risk for suboptimal preps. Because obtaining written consent is not practical given that these patients may not be seen by a UVA provider prior to their endoscopic procedure, the investigators will plan to verbally consent via the telephone in an all-inclusive manner; there will be no randomization but rather the selection of prep to be determined by the novel scoring system. Subjects be prescribed either a standard split-dose GoLytely prep (or SuPrep) or an extended split-dose GoLytely prep. The investigators predict that utilizing this new system will lead to a decreased number of inadequate bowel preps and will increase polyp detection. The investigators will work with a UVA biostatistician to analyze the data and use Chi Square, student's T tests, and logistic regression models to assess significance and help validate the model.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NON_RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
SCREENING
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Orton Score Cohort - High
Patients will be scored using the "Orton Score," a novel clinical prediction tool to determine which patients are at risk for poor bowel preps and may benefit from an extended prep. If they score highly, they will receive an extended GoLytely bowel prep.
Orton Score
Significant a priori predictors of poor prep included: male gender, COPD, diabetes with end-organ damage, severe neurologic disease, constipation medication use, and tricyclic antidepressant use. Proprietary web-based weighted scoring model allows screening clinician to predict which bowel prep would be best for patient depending on which risk factors patients have.
Prospective Orton Score Cohort - Low
Patients will be scored using the "Orton Score," a novel clinical prediction tool to determine which patients are at risk for poor bowel preps and may benefit from an extended prep. If they do not score highly, they will receive a standard GoLytely (or Suprep) bowel prep.
Orton Score
Significant a priori predictors of poor prep included: male gender, COPD, diabetes with end-organ damage, severe neurologic disease, constipation medication use, and tricyclic antidepressant use. Proprietary web-based weighted scoring model allows screening clinician to predict which bowel prep would be best for patient depending on which risk factors patients have.
Retrospective Cohort (before Orton Score)
Typical Standard of Care
Clinician usual practice of prescribing bowel preps to patient
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Orton Score
Significant a priori predictors of poor prep included: male gender, COPD, diabetes with end-organ damage, severe neurologic disease, constipation medication use, and tricyclic antidepressant use. Proprietary web-based weighted scoring model allows screening clinician to predict which bowel prep would be best for patient depending on which risk factors patients have.
Typical Standard of Care
Clinician usual practice of prescribing bowel preps to patient
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Referred for open access colonoscopy from an outside provider/UVA provider
* Able to provide informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
100 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Virginia
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Steven Powell, MD
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Steven M Powell, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Virginia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Virginia Medical Center
Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Johnson DA, Barkun AN, Cohen LB, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Martel M, Robertson DJ, Boland CR, Giardello FM, Lieberman DA, Levin TR, Rex DK; US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2014 Oct;147(4):903-24. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002. No abstract available.
Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. 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 Mar;61(3):378-84. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02776-2.
Sherer EA, Imler TD, Imperiale TF. The effect of colonoscopy preparation quality on adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Mar;75(3):545-53. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.022. Epub 2011 Dec 3.
Lebwohl B, Kastrinos F, Glick M, Rosenbaum AJ, Wang T, Neugut AI. The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1207-14. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.051. Epub 2011 Apr 8.
Chokshi RV, Hovis CE, Hollander T, Early DS, Wang JS. Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jun;75(6):1197-203. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005. Epub 2012 Feb 28.
Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR, Bratcher LL. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jul;97(7):1696-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05827.x.
Khan MA, Piotrowski Z, Brown MD. Patient acceptance, convenience, and efficacy of single-dose versus split-dose colonoscopy bowel preparation. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010 Apr;44(4):310-1. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181c2c92a. No abstract available.
Marmo R, Rotondano G, Riccio G, Marone A, Bianco MA, Stroppa I, Caruso A, Pandolfo N, Sansone S, Gregorio E, D'Alvano G, Procaccio N, Capo P, Marmo C, Cipolletta L. Effective bowel cleansing before colonoscopy: a randomized study of split-dosage versus non-split dosage regimens of high-volume versus low-volume polyethylene glycol solutions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Aug;72(2):313-20. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.02.048. Epub 2010 Jun 19.
Eun CS, Han DS, Hyun YS, Bae JH, Park HS, Kim TY, Jeon YC, Sohn JH. The timing of bowel preparation is more important than the timing of colonoscopy in determining the quality of bowel cleansing. Dig Dis Sci. 2011 Feb;56(2):539-44. doi: 10.1007/s10620-010-1457-1. Epub 2010 Nov 2.
Siddiqui AA, Yang K, Spechler SJ, Cryer B, Davila R, Cipher D, Harford WV. Duration of the interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy predicts bowel-preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):700-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.047.
Ben-Horin S, Bar-Meir S, Avidan B. The outcome of a second preparation for colonoscopy after preparation failure in the first procedure. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):626-30. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.027.
Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Hernandez G, Aldea A, Nicolas-Perez D, Jimenez A, Carrillo M, Felipe V, Alarcon-Fernandez O, Hernandez-Guerra M, Romero R, Alonso I, Gonzalez Y, Adrian Z, Moreno M, Ramos L, Quintero E. Comparison of Two Intensive Bowel Cleansing Regimens in Patients With Previous Poor Bowel Preparation: A Randomized Controlled Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jun;112(6):951-958. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2017.53. Epub 2017 Mar 14.
ASGE Standards of Practice Committee; Saltzman JR, Cash BD, Pasha SF, Early DS, Muthusamy VR, Khashab MA, Chathadi KV, Fanelli RD, Chandrasekhara V, Lightdale JR, Fonkalsrud L, Shergill AK, Hwang JH, Decker GA, Jue TL, Sharaf R, Fisher DA, Evans JA, Foley K, Shaukat A, Eloubeidi MA, Faulx AL, Wang A, Acosta RD. Bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Apr;81(4):781-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.048. Epub 2015 Jan 14. No abstract available.
Chung YW, Han DS, Park KH, Kim KO, Park CH, Hahn T, Yoo KS, Park SH, Kim JH, Park CK. Patient factors predictive of inadequate bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol: a prospective study in Korea. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2009 May-Jun;43(5):448-52. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181662442.
Mahmood S, Farooqui SM, Madhoun MF. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;30(8):819-826. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001175.
Yadlapati R, Johnston ER, Gregory DL, Ciolino JD, Cooper A, Keswani RN. Predictors of Inadequate Inpatient Colonoscopy Preparation and Its Association with Hospital Length of Stay and Costs. Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Nov;60(11):3482-90. doi: 10.1007/s10620-015-3761-2. Epub 2015 Jun 21.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
21825
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id