RESUMO
Background: The one-person technique (OPT) for colonoscope insertion is recommended by professional societies and regarded as standard practice. However, the two-person technique (TPT) has shown several advantages over the OPT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the TPT compared to the OPT. Methods: In this prospective study, consecutive individuals presenting for outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to undergo colonoscopy by OPT or by TPT. The colonoscopies were performed by six endoscopists, two of whom were beginners, two with intermediate skills, and two who were experts. The primary endpoints were quality indicators for colonoscopy, including adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate, cecal insertion time, and total colonoscopy time. A secondary outcome was procedure tolerability, as assessed by both the patients and the endoscopists. Results: Two hundred and four subjects (117 males, mean age 54.3) were randomized to either one- (n = 102) or two-person (n = 102) colonoscopy. The adenoma detection rate was 30.4% in OPT group and 34.3% in TPT group. (p = 0.55). No significant differences between the two groups were found in terms of cecal intubation rate (98/102 vs. 98/102), insertion time (411 vs. 381 s), and total examination time (1426 vs. 1296 s). However, patients receiving the TPT had lower pain scores than patients receiving the OPT. Endoscopist fatigue measured with the FACIT-F was also significantly lower in the TPT group. Conclusion: The two-person colonoscopy method was not shown to be technically or clinically inferior. Rather, the TPT can improve patient tolerance and reduce endoscopist fatigue.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is less prevalent in females than males, but it affects mortality in females. There may be sex differences in the clinical characteristics of COPD. METHODS: We analyzed the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey dataset from 2007 to 2018. We compared the clinical characteristics and comorbidities in subjects with COPD according to sex. We adjusted the multivariate logistic regression of lung cancer prevalence according to COPD and sex by age and smoking amount. RESULTS: Females with COPD tended to be older than males with COPD (64.1 ± 0.4 yr vs. 62.3 ± 0.2 yr, respectively, p < 0.001). Approximately 89% of males with COPD had a smoking history, while 86% of females with COPD were non-smokers (p < 0.001). Household income was lower (p < 0.001) and asthma and overall malignancy were more prevalent in females with COPD than males with COPD (25.5 vs. 11.6%, respectively, p < 0.001; (6.3 vs. 5.4%, respectively, p < 0.001). However, lung cancer was more common in males with COPD than females with COPD (0.9 vs. 0.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). Lung cancer prevalence increased in males with moderate COPD compared to subjects without COPD (OR, 4.409; 95% CI, 1.741-9.419). CONCLUSION: Females with COPD had a lower smoking rate, household income, and lung cancer prevalence than males with COPD. More active COPD screening is needed for women of low socioeconomic status, even if they do not smoke.
