AzTrials
AzTrials

Colonoscopy EducationNCT01482546

Comparing Clinical Performance of Novice Trainee Endoscopists Using Conventional Air Insufflation Versus Warm Water Infusion Colonoscopy

An observational study of Colonoscopy Education, run by University of California, Davis at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Hypothesis: Novice trainees will achieve significantly higher clinical competence and patient satisfaction scores with the use of warm water infusion method when compared with traditional air insufflation Primary outcome: adenoma detection rate Secondary outcomes: (1) independent cecal intubation rate, (2) trainer… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Colonoscopy Education
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
How many people
6 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
May 2012to Sep 2016
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: First Year Gastroenterology Trainees

Who may be able to join

  • Novice endoscopists without prior colonoscopy experience

Who cannot join

  • Trainees who do not meet the basic prerequisites as stated above, or who are not willing to participate in the study

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • University of California Davis

    Sacramento, California, 95817

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Randomized Cross-Over Comparing Clinical Performance of Novice Trainee Endoscopists Using Conventional Air Insufflation Versus Warm Water Infusion Colonoscopy

Hypothesis: Novice trainees will achieve significantly higher clinical competence and patient satisfaction scores with the use of warm water infusion method when compared with traditional air insufflation

Primary outcome: adenoma detection rate

Read more

Secondary outcomes: (1) independent cecal intubation rate, (2) trainer assessment of trainee's colonoscopy skills, (3) trainee's assessment of clinical confidence, (4) procedural medication requirement, (5) patient pain level during procedure, (6) patient satisfaction at procedure completion, and (7) patient willingness to repeat procedure'

Specific Aim: To demonstrate the stated hypothesis via above outcome measures. The long term goal is to provide evidence to influence other training institutions to consider education in the warm water infusion method'

Read the detailed description

Study Design: Prospective randomized cross-over study in a university based setting (University of California Davis, Sacramento, California) with a diverse patient population.

Participants: Total of 6 first year gastroenterology trainees (3 enrollees per year from July 2011 to July 2012)

Recruitment: Trainees' names and contact information will be acquired via the program director. They will be contacted in person on the first day of their fellowship orientation and provided information regarding the study.

Randomization: A sealed envelope containing the randomized method (conventional air insufflation or warm water infusion) will be opened at the time of signed consent for study participation.

Cross-over Design: Trainees will perform colonoscopies using the randomized method with a dedicated attending physician who uses air and/or water method as part of standard clinical practice for 6 months, at which point they will cross-over to the alternate method of colonoscopy with another dedicated attending for the remaining 6 months of their first year of fellowship.

Air Insufflation Method:

The minimal amount of air will be used during insertion to open the lumen. Minimal amounts of water (10 to 50 mL) at room temperature will be used for washing of residual feces. If insertion is hindered by scope looping, attempts at loop reduction will be made. If advancement does not occur within 3 to 5 minutes, an assistant will provide abdominal compression, followed by changing the patient's position to facilitate passage of the colonoscope. Cecal intubation will be suggested by identification of the appendiceal orifice and ileocecal valve or intubation of the terminal ileum.

Warm Water Infusion Method:

As first described by Dr. Felix W. Leung, the maneuvers can be summarized as warm water infusion in lieu of air insufflation combined with suction removal of all residual colonic air and residual feces by water exchange. Because insufflated air could lengthen the colon and exaggerate angulations at the flexures making insertion more difficult, the air pump will be turned off before insertion of the colonoscope into the rectum to avoid accidental insufflation of air. Further minimization of angulations at the flexures can be achieved by suction removal of all encountered residual air. Warm water (at 36-37ºC) maintained using a water bath and heat saver envelop will be infused intermittently using an Olympus OFP peristaltic flushing pump via an EndoGator auxiliary water port connector and disposable water bottle system for Olympus scopes. The minimum amount of water needed to distend the colon and open the lumen will be used during scope insertion. When the luminal water becomes turbid due to residual feces, the discolored water will be suctioned and replaced by clean water until the lumen is visualized again. If advancement does not occur within 3 to 5 minutes, an assistant will provide abdominal compression, followed by changing the patient's position to facilitate passage of the colonoscope. Cecal intubation will be suggested by appropriate movement of the endoscopic image on the monitor screen when the right lower quadrant is palpated or the appendiceal orifice is visualized under water. The cecum will then be distended by air to confirm visualization of the ileocecal valve and appendiceal orifice. No specific limit will be set for the volume of water to be used.

Colonoscopy Procedures:

Trainees randomized to either use of conventional air insufflation or warm water infusion method will be performing colonoscopies with a dedicated endoscopy attending during their half-day weekly outpatient endoscopy clinics (for which main indications for colonoscopy will be screening or surveillance) for each 6-month study period. Three faculty gastroenterologists will be participating as dedicated research personnel.

Patients will be monitored in a standard fashion (including regular nursing assessments of vital signs and discomfort). The sedation nurse will administer medications during the procedure according to patient pain levels (0=none to 10=most severe) assessed every 3-5 minute intervals or at any time the patient appears to be in discomfort. Standard incremental doses of medications (using either meperidine 25mg or fentanyl 25 mcg and midazolam 1mg) will be offered to the patient when the pain level is ≥ 2. The nurse will record procedural times (start time, cecal intubation time, and end time in minutes), medications administered (for pre-procedural sedation, from procedure start to cecal intubation, and during withdrawal period from cecum to across anus), and attending involvement (hands-on assistance or take-over).

An attending dedicated to colonoscopy training will be present for the entire duration of the procedure. Cecum is considered reached by the attending if clear-cut cecal landmarks are identified (appendiceal orifice, ileocecal valve, or intubation of the terminal ileum). In concordance with prior studies, attending endoscopists will allow trainees 20 minutes to reach the cecum, provided the examination is progressing in a safe manner and the patient is comfortable. If advancement does not occur within 3 to 5 minutes, an assistant will provide abdominal compression, followed by changing the patient's position to facilitate passage of the colonoscope. If the trainee has not reached the cecum by 20 minutes, the instructor will take over until the cecum is reached. The instructor will take over sooner than this if the trainee cannot advance the colonoscope for 5 minutes at the same site, or if it is judged that patient tolerance is becoming a factor. For both the air and water methods, unlimited verbal instruction will be allowed so that the instructor may guide the trainee with descriptions of maneuvers as if he/she were performing the procedure. The instructor will not provide hands-on assistance until either the trainee stated that he or she had reached the cecum, 20 minutes had passed, or it was necessary for the instructor to take over sooner than 20 minutes for one of the reasons stated above.

After each colonoscopy, the instructor will fill out a questionnaire regarding any prior colonic surgery, presence of abnormal anatomy or masses, polyp detection and removal, quality of preparation using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, and difficultly of the procedure (1=very easy to 5=very difficult). Overall assessment of the trainee's colonoscopy skills will be assessed by the instructor after each procedure (1=poor to 5=excellent). The instructor will also indicate whether the cecum was intubated and the colonoscopy completed independently by the trainee, if there was hands-on assistance, or if attending had to take-over the procedure. The trainee will be assessed for ease of learned technique (1=very easy to 5=very difficult) and self-assessment of clinical confidence (1=not at all confident to 5=extremely confident).

Record Keeping and Standardization:

A data collection sheet will be used for each study case, which includes data to be recorded by sedation nurse (procedural times, patient pain scores, medications administered, instructor involvement, and volume of water used), trainee self-evaluation, and attending evaluation of the case and trainee skill. A short post procedural survey that will be provided to patients to assess post-procedural pain, experience, satisfaction, and willingness to undergo repeat procedure. In addition to photographic images documenting cecal intubation that are scanned into our electronic records, a digital video recorder will be used to record all procedures so that the consultant and PI/investigators may review a predetermined 10% of the cases to ensure a uniform standard of reporting times, quality of preparation, polyp detection, and degree of difficulty. Personal identifiers will be removed from all digital images captured. We will track the number of additional colonoscopies that the trainee will perform as part of their inpatient rotations so that it may later be analyzed as a potential confounder. Pathology reports for all removed specimens will be recorded so that adenoma detection rates may be determined.

Statistical Analysis Plan:

Chi-squared (χ2) or Fisher's exact test analysis will be used to compared the proportion of successful trainee unassisted cecal intubation cases (primary outcome) between the conventional air insufflation and warm water infusion colonoscopy methods. Secondary outcome variables will be compared using Chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test or Mann Whitney U test as appropriate. Multivariate logistic regression analysis will be used to evaluate factors affecting cecal intubation time and success. We will also calculate the trainees' learning curves in consecutive blocks of 25 procedures (for air and water methods) using one-way variance analysis and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test to compare unassisted cecal intubation and colonoscopy success rates and time required for cecal intubation and withdrawal as previously reported for conventional air method.

Keywords
colonoscopy, trainees, water, adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Study groups in NCT01482546
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Water Colonoscopy MethodAs first described by Dr. Felix W. Leung, the maneuvers can be summarized as warm water infusion in lieu of air insufflation combined with suction removal of all residual colonic air and residual feces by water exchange. The air pump will be turned off before insertion of the colonoscope into the rectum to avoid accidental insufflation of air. Warm water (at 36-37ºC) maintained using a water bath and heat saver envelop will be infused intermittently. The minimum amount of water needed to distend the colon and open the lumen will be used during scope insertion. Cecal intubation will be suggested by appropriate movement of the endoscopic image on the monitor screen when the right lower quadrant is palpated or the appendiceal orifice visualized under water. The cecum will then be distended by air to confirm visualization of the ileocecal valve and appendiceal orifice. No specific limit will be set for the volume of water to be used.
Air Colonoscopy MethodThe minimal amount of air will be used during insertion to open the lumen. Minimal amounts of water (10 to 50 mL) at room temperature will be used for washing of residual feces. If insertion is hindered by scope looping, attempts at loop reduction will be made. If advancement does not occur within 3 to 5 minutes, an assistant will provide abdominal compression, followed by changing the patient's position to facilitate passage of the colonoscope. Cecal intubation will be suggested by identification of the appendiceal orifice and ileocecal valve or intubation of the terminal ileum.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. adenoma detection rate

    Measured: two years

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. independent cecal intubation rate

    Measured: two years

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted30 Nov 2011 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2012
  3. Primary completionSep 2016
  4. Study completionSep 2016

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
6 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01482546
Sponsor's protocol ID
238499
Status last verified
Jun 2017
First submitted
27 Nov 2011
Last updated
27 Jun 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Colonoscopy Education, run by University of California, Davis at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jun 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

adenoma detection rate (time frame: two years). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jun 2017.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in