Gastrointestinal System Symptoms, Psychological Resilience, Emotional Self-Efficacy, and Healthy Living Behaviors in Patients Scheduled for Endoscopy/Colonoscopy.

Gastrointestinal symptoms are very common worldwide. This study aimed to examine the relationship between gastrointestinal system symptoms, psychological resilience, emotional self-efficacy, and healthy living behaviors in patients. The study was conducted in a training and research hospital in Türkiye with 258 patients who had experienced gastrointestinal symptoms and were scheduled for upper endoscopy and/or colonoscopy. The data were obtained by using an information form, the Brief Resilience Scale, the Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, the Healthy Lifestyle Behaviors Scale, and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. A statistically positive and significant relationship was found between the Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale and the Healthy Lifestyle Behaviors Scale (r = 0.376; p < .05). It was determined that there was a statistically significant negative relationship between the mean Brief Resilience Scale and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale scores (r = -0.150; p < .05). In addition, a positive and significant relationship was found between the mean Brief Resilience Scale and the Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale scores (r = 0.374; p < .05). Psychological factors and healthy living behaviors thus clearly affect gastrointestinal system symptoms. For this reason, it is thought that planning interventions to teach self-management through healthy living behaviors and promoting psychological resilience may reduce gastrointestinal system symptoms.

Surveillance Compliance and Quality of Life Assessment Among Surgical Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) syndrome has a near-100% lifetime risk of colorectal cancer. Early surveillance and prophylactic surgery have been advocated to reduce this risk. However, the surveillance practices among FAP individuals in Saudi Arabia are unknown. We aimed to explore surveillance compliance in our population, as well as the disease impact on their quality of life (QoL). METHODS: All patients with FAP who underwent surgical resection at King Saud University Medical City between 2016 and 2022 were included. Demographic data, clinical features, family history, and compliance with surveillance were collected and analyzed. QoL questionnaires: Short-form health survey (SF-36) and European Organization for Research and Treatment (EORTC) were conducted by phone interview. RESULTS: A total of 14 patients were included with an average age of 25 years. Three patients (21.4%) were the first of their family members to develop FAP. Nine patients (64%) were untested for genetic mutation due to lack of referral to geneticists. The compliance rate toward both pre-operative colonoscopy and upper endoscopy were 78%. However, 38% and 27% compliance rates were observed toward initial and post-operative colonoscopy, respectively. The compliance rate was 14% toward thyroid ultrasound. QoL scores varied among patients, with a mean score above 60 across all SF-36 domains. CONCLUSION: An overall poor compliance was observed among our participants, particularly toward thyroid ultrasound. Increased health awareness and patient education are essential. In addition, the importance of surveillance and genetic counseling should be emphasized among physicians treating these patients.

Mental disorders, participation, and trajectories in the Danish colorectal cancer programme: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with mental disorders exhibit increased mortality due to colorectal cancer, despite having a similar incidence to the general population. We aimed to evaluate the extent to which people with mental disorders participate in organised colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of all Danish residents aged 50-74 years who were invited to undergo biennial faecal immunochemical testing between March 1, 2014, and Sept 30, 2018. We used national registry data from all first-time invitees. The primary endpoint was participation within 90 days of invitation. We calculated the proportion who participated and assessed their screening results and adherence to and completeness of follow-up colonoscopy according to their history of mental disorders, classified as none, mild or moderate, or severe. We computed crude and adjusted participation differences in percentage points and participation ratios using the pseudo-observations method. FINDINGS: Of 2 036 704 people who were invited, we included 2 036 352 in the final cohort, of whom 1 008 045 (49·5%) were men and 1 028 307 (50·5%) were women, with a mean age of 60·7 years (SD 8·3, range 49-78). Data on ethnicity were not collected. Compared with people with no mental disorders, the adjusted analysis showed lower participation among people with mild or moderate mental disorders (men: participation difference -4·4 percentage points [95% CI -4·7 to -4·1]; women: -3·8 percentage points [-4·1 to -3·6]) and severe mental disorders (men: participation difference -13·8 percentage points [-14·3 to -13·3]; women: -15·4 percentage points [-15·8 to -14·9]). People with mental disorders had a higher proportion of positive faecal immunochemical test results, lower adherence to colonoscopy, and more incomplete colonoscopies than people without mental disorders. INTERPRETATION: People with mental disorders were less likely to participate in colorectal cancer screening than those without these disorders. Patients with mental disorders could benefit from support or encouragement from their general practitioner or mental health-care facility to participate in cancer screening. Potential interventions should consider type of mental disorder, as needs might differ. FUNDING: Danish Cancer Society, Danish Health Foundation.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Puerto Rico.

The purpose of this study was to describe the psychosocial factors influencing participation in colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) among Puerto Rican men and women. We conducted seven focus groups in metropolitan and rural areas of Puerto Rico (PR) with men and women (using gender specific groups) aged 50 to 80 years (n = 51) who were non-adherent to CRC guidelines. The focus group guide included questions related to colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. We analyzed data using a modified grounded theory approach to identify emergent themes. Focus groups revealed seven major themes that represented barriers to CRCS: (1) lack of CRC knowledge, (2) lack of knowledge about colorectal cancer screening tests as well as the required preparation, (3) embarrassment, (4) low perceived benefit of CRCS and sense of fatalism, (5) transportation (mostly among participants in rural areas), (6) lack of time, and (7) financial burden. All participants understood the benefits of CRCS once the procedure was explained. Additionally, participants reported a lack of provider recommendation for CRCS. In this group of Puerto Rican participants who were non-adherent to CRCS, there were misconceptions about CRC, screening tests available, and preparation and testing procedures. Participants' low levels of knowledge and negative attitudes concerning CRCS and low reported provider recommendation were important deterrents to screening. These findings suggest the need for educational efforts to increase knowledge and attitudes about CRCS and improved patient-provider communication to reduce missed opportunities to recommend.

Compliance To Colonoscopy In Patients Visiting The Department Of Gastroenterology At Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar.

Background: Colorectal cancer is the largest cause of mortality in patients admitted to any Gastroenterology units. Diagnostic colonoscopy is a valuable tool for the disease's diagnosis and proper treatment but its compliance has been historically low. Our main objective was to find out social, cultural, and psychological barriers among those patients who finally did not show up for their colonoscopy appointment and, make a comparative analysis with those who did. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar from October 2021 to March 2022, selecting 224 patients through consecutive sampling. Results: Out of the 224 patients included, males (48.2%) were more likely to show up for the procedure than females (51.8%) (p<0.05). Overall, the most recurring barrier was a lack of knowledge with 116 (51.7%) for both the groups, but especially more for the non-compliant patients (p<0.05). Fear of results, fear of complications of the procedure, and affordability issues stood out as important differences between the compliant and non-compliant patients. Conclusion: For the country's healthcare to be able to overcome these problems, and enter an era where screening colonoscopy is a norm, mass education regarding the issue is imperative.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Aversion to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale.

OBJECTIVE: Avoidance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is well documented with emotional barriers deterring screening intention and uptake. However, the assessment of such aversion is limited by the available instruments focusing on siloed emotions or screening procedures, limiting relevance to the complete process of decision-making in the CRC context. METHODS: To address this gap, psychometric properties of the newly developed Aversion to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale (ABCSS) were assessed using data from 640 CRC screening eligible asymptomatic community members. Item review and piloting reduced 179 items to the initial 29-item scale. Using a holdout sample technique, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, reliability and validity checks were conducted. RESULTS: A three-factor model (Fecal Occult Blood Test [FOBT] Aversion, Colonoscopy Aversion and Health Conscientiousness) with 21 items was identified. Analyses of the 21-item ABCSS indicated excellent reliabilities for the scale and subscales (α = .91 to .95). Correlations with relevant existing measures, intention and behaviour indicated good construct validity. CONCLUSION: The ABCSS is a valid measure of aversion to CRC screening for asymptomatic community members facing the decision to undertake CRC screening. This instrument may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process for CRC screening.

Factors Contributing to Non-Attendance of GI Endoscopic Procedures in a Tertiary Care Center in the Middle East.

INTRODUCTION: The cancer burden in the Middle East is high and growing. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer for both men and women in the UAE. Although early diagnosis of malignancy reduces morbidity and increases the survival rates, non-attendance of gastroenterology (GI) endoscopic procedures is a significant global problem, which can lead to delay in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Several factors have been found to contribute to non-attendance behavior, including socioeconomic, cultural, and organizational related barriers. The purpose of this study was to identify factors contributing to non-attendance behavior among outpatients scheduled for GI endoscopic procedures in a tertiary hospital in the United Arab Emirates. We conclude with recommendations that can help in reducing the rate of patient no-shows for GI endoscopic procedures in the region. METHODS: In a tertiary medical center in the Middle East, we surveyed patients who did not attend their scheduled GI endoscopic procedures over a period of one year. The questionnaire sought to identify possible reasons for patient's non-attendance. Descriptive measures including means, standard deviation, frequencies, and percentages were used to analyze the demographic characteristics of the study participants. The chi-square test was performed to analyze gender differences. RESULTS: Of 314 outpatients who met study inclusion criteria, 168 agreed to participate (53.5% response rate). The majority of participants were women (n=96, 60.4 %), aged 18 to 73, with a mean of 42 years. The largest age group was between 35 and 44 (n=46, 28.9 %). Approximately equal numbers of non-attendance appointments were scheduled for combined colonoscopy and upper endoscopy (36.3 %), colonoscopy alone (31.3 %), or upper endoscopy alone (31.3 %). The most common causes for cancellation or non-attendance included concerns about the appointment (35.5%), inconvenient timing of the appointment (27.9%) and changes in medical status (26.4%). Gender differences were noted for non-attendance behaviors, with women significantly more likely than men to report feelings of embarrassment (Chi-square 6.261, df=1, p=.012). CONCLUSION: Our study has identified several barriers to patient attendance of endoscopic procedures, as well as opportunities to reduce the rate of patient no-shows, including patient education, scheduling options, and protocols to minimize discomfort and misconceptions around GI endoscopic procedures, particularly accommodating for same gender endoscopists, with the ultimate goal of increasing early cancer screening and prevention.

Second Victim Experience and Perception Discordance of the Colonoscopic Perforation.

BACKGROUND: Perforation is the most serious adverse event of colonoscopy, but rarely considered from the view of colonoscopists' second victim experience and perception discordance between colonoscopists and patients. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate colonoscopists' second victim experience and the perception discordance between colonoscopists and patients for the colonoscopic perforation. METHODS: A survey for colonoscopic perforation was performed for the colonoscopists and outpatients who visited the university hospital between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. The questionnaire included questions regarding colonoscopists' satisfaction for the intervention strategies offered to patients and patient-colonoscopist perception on colonoscopic perforation. A modified Korean version of the "Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (K-SVEST)" was used to assess the second victim experiences and supportive resources for the colonoscopists. RESULTS: Survey results from 160 colonoscopists and 165 patients were analyzed. The colonoscopists' satisfaction scores were higher for strategies related to sufficient explanation, empathy, courteous listening, and monetary compensation. The scores of the K-SVEST for the second victim experience were highest in psychological distress, followed by loss of professional self-efficacy, colleague support, physical distress, non-work-related support, institutional support, and turnover intentions/absenteeism. Significant patient-colonoscopist discordance was noted for the same colonoscopic perforation scenario on the judgment of medical error, health professionals' apology, monetary compensation, and criminal penalties for the colonoscopists. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopists can suffer emotionally and physically from the second victim experience after colonoscopic perforation. In addition, the significant patient-colonoscopist discordance should be considered to make a better communication for the colonoscopic perforation.

Differences in Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence Among Women Residing in Urban and Rural Communities in the United States.

Importance: Screening for breast and colorectal cancer has resulted in reductions in mortality; however, questions remain regarding how these interventions are being diffused to all segments of the population. If an intervention is less amenable to diffusion, it could be associated with disparities in mortality rates, especially in rural vs urban areas. Objectives: To compare the prevalence of breast and colorectal cancer screening adherence and to identify factors associated with screening adherence among women residing in rural vs urban areas in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study of women aged 50 to 75 years in 11 states was conducted from 2017 to 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adherence to cancer screening based on the US Preventative Services Task Force guidelines. For breast cancer screening, women who had mammograms in the past 2 years were considered adherent. For colorectal cancer screening, women who had (1) a stool test in the past year, (2) a colonoscopy in the past 10 years, or (3) a sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years were considered adherent. Rural status was coded using Rural Urban Continuum Codes, and other variables were assessed to identify factors associated with screening. Results: The overall sample of 2897 women included 1090 (38.4%) rural residents; 2393 (83.5%) non-Hispanic White women; 263 (9.2%) non-Hispanic Black women; 68 (2.4%) Hispanic women; 1629 women (56.2%) aged 50 to 64 years; and 712 women (24.8%) with a high school education or less. Women residing in urban areas were significantly more likely to be adherent to colorectal cancer screening compared with women residing in rural areas (1429 [82%] vs 848 [78%]; P = .01), whereas the groups were equally likely to be adherent to breast cancer screening (1347 [81%] vs 830 [81%]; P = .78). Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression analyses confirmed that rural residence was associated with lower odds of being adherent to colorectal cancer screening (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.99, P = .047). Non-Hispanic Black race was associated with adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.78-4.56; P < .001) but not colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, women residing in rural areas were less likely to be adherent to colorectal cancer screening guidelines but were similarly adherent to breast cancer screening. This suggests that colorectal cancer screening, a more recent intervention, may not be as available in rural areas as breast cancer screening, ie, colorectal screening has lower amenability.

"Rescue" of Nonparticipants in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Three Noninvasive Test Options.

Few studies have directly targeted nonparticipants in colorectal cancer screening to identify effective engagement strategies. We undertook a randomized controlled trial that targeted nonparticipants in a previous trial of average-risk subjects which compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, a blood test or a choice of either. Nonparticipants (n = 899) were randomized to be offered a kit containing a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), directions on how to arrange a blood DNA test, or the option of doing either. Screening participation was assessed 12 weeks after the offer. To assess the cognitive and attitudinal variables related to participation and invitee choice, invitees were surveyed after 12 weeks, and associations were investigated using multinomial logistic regression. Participation rates were similar between groups (P = 0.88): 12.0% for FIT (35/292), 13.3% for the blood test (39/293), and 13.4% for choice (39/290). Within the choice group, participation was significantly higher with FIT (9.7%, 28/290) compared with the blood test (3.8%, 11/290, P = 0.005). The only variable significantly associated with participation was socioeconomic status when offered FIT, and age when offered choice but there was none when offered the blood test. Survey respondents indicated that convenience, time-saving, comfort, and familiarity were major influences on participation. There was no clear advantage between a fecal test, blood test, or choice of test although, when given a choice, the fecal test was preferred. Differences in variables associated with participation according to invitation strategy warrant consideration when deciding upon an invitation strategy for screening nonparticipants. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This trial of screening for those at average risk for colorectal cancer targeted past fecal-test nonparticipants and compared participation rates for mailed invitations offering a fecal test, blood test, or choice of either. Although there was no clear advantage between strategies, factors associated with participation differed between each strategy.

Safety and efficacy of cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps: A prospective randomized control trial and one-year follow-up study.

TRIAL DESIGN: Elimination of small colorectal polyps with cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is reported to be as safe as hot snare polypectomy (HSP). The effectiveness of CSP has not been clearly defined, and the incidence of long-term recurrence has not been determined. We conducted a randomized control study and one-year follow-up study to assess their safety and efficacy. METHODS: Patients with small colorectal polyps were randomized to receive CSP or HSP. Polypectomy was performed to determine the pathological curability, and patients completed a questionnaire about the tolerability of the procedure. Follow-up colonoscopy was performed to determine the local recurrence of adenoma. The major outcome was the non-inferiority of CSP to HSP in the rate of delayed bleeding and minor outcomes, including the incidence of immediate bleeding and perforation, procedural time, and the resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 119 participants were recruited in this randomized study and underwent polypectomy. Among the 458 polyps, 332 eligible polyps were analyzed. The rate of adverse events was 0.6% (1/175) for CSP and 0% (0/157) for HSP, which showed the non-inferiority of CSP. While the complete resection rate of CSP was very high (100%), the R0 rate was not satisfactory (horizontal margin, 65.5%; vertical margin, 89.1%). Two local recurrences (2.5%) were observed in the follow-up of 80 adenomas treated with CSP. No recurrence was found in 79 lesions in the HSP group, which was not significant (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal polyps were safely resected using CSP, similar to HSP. Most would agree to say that CSP is considered safer than HSP. The main question is then related to efficacy. Our results of the present study demonstrate that recurrence after CSP should be carefully managed for curative treatment.

National Survey of Patient Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening Preferences.

Recommended colorectal cancer screening modalities vary with respect to safety, efficacy, and cost. Better understanding of the factors that influence patient preference is, therefore, critical for improving population adherence to colorectal cancer screening. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a panel survey focused on three commonly utilized colorectal cancer screening options [fecal immunochemical test or guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FIT/gFOBT), multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, and colonoscopy] with a national sample of U.S. adults, ages 40-75 years and at average risk of colorectal cancer, in November 2019. Of 5,097 panelists invited to participate, 1,595 completed the survey (completion rate, 31.3%). Our results showed that when presented a choice between two colorectal cancer screening modalities, more respondents preferred mt-sDNA (65.4%) over colonoscopy, FIT/gFOBT (61%) over colonoscopy, and mt-sDNA (66.9%) over FIT/gFOBT. Certain demographic characteristics and awareness of and/or experience with various screening modalities influenced preferences. For example, uninsured people were more likely to prefer stool-based tests over colonoscopy [OR, 2.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22-5.65 and OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.13-7.47]. People who had heard of stool-based screening were more likely to prefer mt-sDNA over FIT/gFOBT (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.26-3.40). People who previously had a stool-based test were more likely to prefer FIT/gFOBT over colonoscopy (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.74-4.41), while people who previously had a colonoscopy were less likely to prefer mt-sDNA or FIT/gFOBT over colonoscopy (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.63 and OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.26-0.62). Our survey demonstrated broad patient preference for stool-based tests over colonoscopy, contrasting the heavy reliance on colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in clinical practice and highlighting the importance of considering patient preference in colorectal cancer screening recommendations. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Our national survey demonstrated broad patient preference for stool-based tests over colonoscopy, contrasting the heavy reliance on colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in clinical practice and highlighting the importance of considering patient preference in colorectal screening recommendations.

Screening Colonoscopy for Colon Cancer in Women during COVID-19 Pandemic.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the top three leading causes of death in both men and women. However, screening can help detect and prevent CRC. Multiple guidelines recommend CRC screening using stool-based screening and direct visualization via colonoscopy. Anatomically, women have a longer total colonic length, especially in the transverse colon, which makes it redundant; thus it is more difficult to perform complete endoscopy in women. Women also have a higher risk of developing right-sided colon cancer of the flat and depressed type, which is harder to detect than the other types. Moreover, women are less likely to undergo colonoscopy due to embarrassment, especially when the procedure is performed by male gastroenterologists, and the lack of available female gastroenterologists further complicates the problem. The current COVID-19 pandemic also decreases patients' willingness to undergo screening due to the fear of contracting the COVID-19. Delay in diagnosis leads to more advanced tumors upon detection and ultimately decreases the survival rate, especially in women, as they have lower 1-year survival rate when CRC is detected in its later stages than in men. Innovative options for CRC screening have recently emerged, including colon capsule endoscopy, which can be performed in a clinic and may reduce the need for colonoscopy. However, sex-specific CRC screening guidelines and tools are not available. The objective of this review is to identify the barriers and challenges faced when performing screening colonoscopy in women, especially during the pandemic and to encourage the development of sex-specific CRC screening.

Improving the discomfort and satisfaction of colonoscopy by distraction with smartphones: A prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is an uncomfortable procedure. Distraction is thought to reduce pain by decreasing the amount of attention a person spends on a painful stimulus. We aimed to assess the usefulness of smartphones on discomfort associated with the colonoscopy. METHODS: We designated 360 enrolled patients according to prospective randomized controlled study into two groups, including smartphone (SP) group (Relaxation by smartphones) and Control group (No relaxation). Measured outcomes included the discomfort, satisfaction, polyp detection rate and the willingness to repeat colonoscopy were analyzed between groups. RESULTS: The pain and distension scores of SP group patients were significantly lower than those of the Control group (2.18 ±â€Š2.80 vs 3.55 ±â€Š3.07, P < .001; 4.15 ±â€Š2.35 vs 4.79 ±â€Š2.36, P = .011, respectively). Importantly, patient-reported satisfaction scores of the SP group were significantly higher than those of the Control group (96.45 ±â€Š7.17 vs 91.12 ±â€Š10.49, respectively; P < .001). Moreover, although there were no statistical differences, patients using smartphones were more likely to have shorter reach cecum times (09m:11 s vs 07m:37 s, P = .116) and more polyp detection rate (13.3% vs 9.4%, P = .246). In addition, more patients using smartphones were willing to repeat colonoscopy but no statistical difference (85.0% vs 81.7%, P = .396). CONCLUSION: Patient using smartphone is a special manner to increase satisfaction during colonoscopy with a less discomfort and is more likely to be polyp detection rate.

Intentions to undergo primary screening with colonoscopy under the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea.

BACKGROUND: We sought to investigate intentions to undergo primary screening with colonoscopy in an attempt to predict future colorectal cancer screening behaviors and the feasibility of implementing colonoscopy as the primary screening modality for colorectal cancer in the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) of Korea. METHODS: Data were obtained from a nationwide online survey conducted in 2018. The survey included a total of 800 eligible adults aged over 45 years. Study measures included the history of screening colonoscopy within the past 10 years and intentions to undergo primary screening with colonoscopy under the NCSP based on the five constructs of the Health Belief Model. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine factors associated with intentions to undergo primary screening with colonoscopy. RESULTS: Approximately 77% of the participants expressed strong willingness to undergo primary screening with colonoscopy under the NCSP. Higher perceived severity and perceived benefits were significantly associated with stronger intentions to undergo screening with colonoscopy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.14 and aOR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.76-4.28, respectively). Greater perceived barriers (aOR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.93) were significantly associated with weaker intentions. Cues to action elicited the strongest screening intentions (aOR, 8.28; 95% CI, 5.23-13.12). CONCLUSION: The current study findings highlight the need for increasing awareness of the severity of CRC and the benefits of colonoscopy screening. Family-orientated recommendation strategies and reducing complications may boost an individual's intentions to undergo colonoscopy.

Patient Engagement with Interactive Text Message System Improves Successful Colonoscopy Rates in an Outpatient Endoscopy Center.

INTRODUCTION: Text message-based interventions reduce colonoscopy no-show rates and improve bowel preparation scores. In this non-randomized study, we assessed whether an interactive text messaging system could improve colonoscopy outcomes. METHODS: Colonoscopy pre-procedural instructions were programmed into a dedicated software platform created for this study. In the intervention arm, text messages were sent to veterans during a 4-week study period. Validated pre-procedural satisfaction questionnaires were completed by patients during standard protocol and intervention periods. Demographics and colonoscopy outcomes data were compared between the standard protocol and intervention arms, including procedure completion rate on scheduled date, Boston bowel preparation score (BPPS), adenoma detection rate, and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 241 patients, 128 were in the standard protocol arm and 113 in the intervention arm. Higher proportions of patients receiving text messages underwent colonoscopy on their scheduled date (69.9%) compared to the ones in the standard protocol (50.8%, p = 0.015). Patients with ≥3 interactions with the system had 80.6% likelihood of completing colonoscopy on the scheduled date compared to 56.9% with <3 interactions and 50.8% with standard protocol (p < 0.001). Frequency of interaction with the system was similar between older (>65 years) and younger patients (p = 1.0). Among older patients, colonoscopy was completed successfully in 84.2% when alert-based human interactions occurred compared to 65.6% in those without and 47.9% with standard protocol (p = 0.018). More than 90% indicated they would recommend the system to patients undergoing future colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: An interactive text messaging system improves successful colonoscopy rates in a VA setting, with greatest impact in older patients.

Watching Videos of Colonoscopies and Receiving Interpretations Reduce Pain and Anxiety While Increasing the Satisfaction of Patients.

BACKGROUND: Pain associated with colonoscopies is a major barrier to patients participating in colorectal cancer screenings. While sedation and analgesia are used to reduce pain during the procedure, they are associated with increased complications and costs. Thus, it is necessary to identity novel techniques to relieve pain in a safe and cost-effective way. AIMS: To test whether watching real-time videos of colonoscopies while receiving detailed interpretations of the procedures reduces pain and anxiety and increases a patient's satisfaction. METHODS: Patients were randomized into three groups including a group who watched real-time videos of their colonoscopies (Group A), a group who watched real-time videos of their colonoscopies while receiving detailed interpretations of the procedures from the endoscopists (Group B), and a group who did not receive either method (Group C). RESULTS: Pain and anxiety scores were significantly (Group A vs. Group C, [Formula: see text]; Group B vs. Group C, [Formula: see text]) lower in Groups A and B compared to Group C. Additionally, significantly (Group A vs. Group C, [Formula: see text]; Group B vs. Group C, [Formula: see text]) increased satisfaction was observed in Groups A and B compared to Group C. There were no statistically significant differences observed in the pain and anxiety scores when comparing Groups A and B. However, the overall satisfaction score was significantly ([Formula: see text]) higher in Group B compared to Group A. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time videos of colonoscopies as well as videos along with detailed interpretations of the procedures decrease pain and anxiety while improving satisfaction in patients undergoing colonoscopies without sedation. Videos combined with interpretations lead to a greater increase in patient satisfaction.

Relationship between health literacy and quality of colonoscopy bowel preparation.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: There are a variety of factors that affect the quality of colonoscopy bowel preparations, although the relationship between the level of health literacy (HL) and the quality of bowel preparations has yet to be clarified. The present study evaluated the effect of HL on the quality of bowel preparation prior to a colonoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 150 patients who underwent a colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening and in whom the quality of bowel preparation was scored during the colonoscopy were recorded prospectively. The European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q47) was used to evaluate HL prior to the colonoscopy, and the Boston bowel preparation scale was used to evaluate the quality of the bowel preparation during the colonoscopy. The demographic characteristics of the patients, the presence of comorbidities, socioeconomic characteristics (marital status, income level, and educational level), HLS-EU-Q47 questionnaire, and Boston bowel preparation scale scores were recorded and evaluated. RESULTS: A significant linear relationship was identified between the general HL index score, the cleanliness of the colonic segments (right, transverse, and left colon) and the total Boston bowel preparation scale score (p=0.013, p=0.010, p=0.008, p=0.001, respectively). In a HL subgroup analysis, a significant linear relationship was noted between disease prevention and health promotion index, the cleanliness of the colonic segments (right, transverse, and left colon), and the total Boston bowel preparation scale score. It was observed that an increase in the health care index resulted in an increase in the cleanliness of the relevant colonic segments and the total Boston bowel preparation scale score. No relationship was found between the right, transverse, and left colon and the total Boston bowel preparation scale scores and gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, marital status, level of income, or educational level. CONCLUSION: The level of HL affects the quality of colonoscopy bowel preparations.

Smartphone education improves embarrassment, bowel preparation, and satisfaction with care in patients receiving colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trail.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is considered a safe and effective tool for detecting colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, the proportion of patients are hesitating to receive colonoscopy. Smartphone education may decrease the barrier of colonoscopy. The aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness of smartphone education in colonoscopy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, controlled study to examine the effectiveness of smartphone education on embarrassment, bowel preparation, and satisfaction in colonoscopy. The patients' embarrassment was measured by the colonoscopy embarrassment scale. The quality of the bowel preparation was evaluated by gastroenterologists according to the Aronchik Scale. The satisfaction of colonoscopy care was assessed by a satisfaction scale developed by the authors. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were analyzed in the smartphone education and control groups (n = 75 in each group). The smartphone education group reported fewer embarrassment (B = -2.78, P = .02) than those of the control group, the patients who were older (B = .15, P = .001) and who were male (B = 2.91, P = .003) showed higher embarrassment. Additionally, smartphone education group were likely to have better colon preparation (odds ratio = 2.46, 95% confidence interval: 1.20-5.02) than that of the control group. Smartphone education also improved the satisfaction with care (ß = 4.60, P < .001), and above normal body mass index decreased the satisfaction with care (ß = -0.19, P < .05). CONCLUSION: Smartphone education improves embarrassment, bowel preparation, and satisfaction with care in patients receiving colonoscopy.

Patient Preferences in Surveillance: Findings From a Discrete Choice Experiment in the "My Follow-Up" Study.

OBJECTIVES: Approximately 800 000 people die globally from colorectal cancer (CRC) every year. Prevention programs promote early detection, but for people with precancerous lesions, tailoring surveillance to include lifestyle-change programs could enhance prevention potential and improve outcomes. METHODS: Those with intermediate or high-risk polyps removed during CRC screening colonoscopy within the Northern Ireland CRC Screening Programme were invited to complete 8 discrete choice questions about tailored surveillance, analyzed using random-parameters logit and a latent class modeling approach. RESULTS: A total of 231 participants (77% male) self-reported comorbid hypertension (53%), high cholesterol (48%), and mean body mass index of 28.7 (overweight). Although 39% of participants were unaware of their CRC risk status, 30.9% indicated they were already making changes to reduce their risk. Although all respondents were significantly risk- and cost-averse, the latent class analysis identified 3 segments (classes): 1. Class 1 (26.8%) significantly favored phone or email support for a lifestyle change, a 17-month testing interval, and noninvasive testing. 2. Class 2 (48.4%) preferred the status quo. 3. Class 3 (24.7%) significantly favored further risk reduction and invasive testing. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first documented preference study focusing on postpolypectomy surveillance offering lifestyle interventions. Although current care is strongly preferred, risk and cost aversion are important for participants. Latent class analysis shows that some respondents are willing to change diet and lifestyle behaviors, reflecting a teachable moment, with opportunities to personalize and optimize surveillance. Significant discordance between perceived and known risk of recurrence and limited recall of risk information provided within current practice suggest necessary improvements to surveillance programs.