Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052 |
Resumo: | Abstract Background: Bowel preparation is a major quality criterion for colonoscopies. Models developed to identify patients with inadequate preparation have not been validated in external cohorts. We aim to validate these models and determine their applicability. Methods: Colonoscopies between April and November 2019 were retrospectively included. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 2 per segment was considered adequate. Insufficient data, incomplete colonoscopies, and total colectomies were excluded. Two models were tested: model 1 (tricyclic antidepressants, opioids, diabetes, constipation, abdominal surgery, previous inadequate preparation, inpatient status, and American Society of Anesthesiol-ogy [ASA] score 3); model 2 (comorbidities, tricyclic antidepressants, constipation, and abdominal surgery). Results: We included 514 patients (63% males; age 61.7 ± 15.6 years), 441 with adequate preparation. The main indications were inflammatory bowel disease (26.1%) and endoscopic treatment (24.9%). Previous surgery (36.2%) and ASA score ≥3 (23.7%) were the most common comorbidities. An ASA score 3 was the only identified predictor for inadequate preparation in this study (p < 0.001, OR 3.28). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of model 1 were 60.3, 64.2, 21.8, and 90.7%, respectively. Model 2 had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 57.5, 67.4, 22.6, and 90.5%, respectively. The AUC for the ROC curves was 0.62 for model 1, 0.62 for model 2, and 0.65 for the ASA score. Conclusions: Although both models accurately predict adequate bowel preparation, they are still unreliable in predicting inadequate preparation and, as such, new models, or further optimization of current ones, are needed. Utilizing the ASA score might be an appro-priate approximation of the risk for inadequate bowel preparation in tertiary hospital populations. |
id |
RCAP_860d8fdf5bca329639245653de0ff7a0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2341-45452023000200052 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital PopulationColonoscopyBowel preparationColonoscopy quality criteriaAbstract Background: Bowel preparation is a major quality criterion for colonoscopies. Models developed to identify patients with inadequate preparation have not been validated in external cohorts. We aim to validate these models and determine their applicability. Methods: Colonoscopies between April and November 2019 were retrospectively included. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 2 per segment was considered adequate. Insufficient data, incomplete colonoscopies, and total colectomies were excluded. Two models were tested: model 1 (tricyclic antidepressants, opioids, diabetes, constipation, abdominal surgery, previous inadequate preparation, inpatient status, and American Society of Anesthesiol-ogy [ASA] score 3); model 2 (comorbidities, tricyclic antidepressants, constipation, and abdominal surgery). Results: We included 514 patients (63% males; age 61.7 ± 15.6 years), 441 with adequate preparation. The main indications were inflammatory bowel disease (26.1%) and endoscopic treatment (24.9%). Previous surgery (36.2%) and ASA score ≥3 (23.7%) were the most common comorbidities. An ASA score 3 was the only identified predictor for inadequate preparation in this study (p < 0.001, OR 3.28). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of model 1 were 60.3, 64.2, 21.8, and 90.7%, respectively. Model 2 had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 57.5, 67.4, 22.6, and 90.5%, respectively. The AUC for the ROC curves was 0.62 for model 1, 0.62 for model 2, and 0.65 for the ASA score. Conclusions: Although both models accurately predict adequate bowel preparation, they are still unreliable in predicting inadequate preparation and, as such, new models, or further optimization of current ones, are needed. Utilizing the ASA score might be an appro-priate approximation of the risk for inadequate bowel preparation in tertiary hospital populations.Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia2023-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.30 n.2 2023reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052Afecto,EdgarPonte,AnaFernandes,SóniaGomes,CatarinaCorreia,João PauloCarvalho,Joãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-02-06T17:34:23Zoai:scielo:S2341-45452023000200052Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T02:36:21.061274Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
title |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
spellingShingle |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population Afecto,Edgar Colonoscopy Bowel preparation Colonoscopy quality criteria |
title_short |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
title_full |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
title_fullStr |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
title_full_unstemmed |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
title_sort |
Validation and Application of Predictive Models for Inadequate Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopies in a Tertiary Hospital Population |
author |
Afecto,Edgar |
author_facet |
Afecto,Edgar Ponte,Ana Fernandes,Sónia Gomes,Catarina Correia,João Paulo Carvalho,João |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Ponte,Ana Fernandes,Sónia Gomes,Catarina Correia,João Paulo Carvalho,João |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Afecto,Edgar Ponte,Ana Fernandes,Sónia Gomes,Catarina Correia,João Paulo Carvalho,João |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Colonoscopy Bowel preparation Colonoscopy quality criteria |
topic |
Colonoscopy Bowel preparation Colonoscopy quality criteria |
description |
Abstract Background: Bowel preparation is a major quality criterion for colonoscopies. Models developed to identify patients with inadequate preparation have not been validated in external cohorts. We aim to validate these models and determine their applicability. Methods: Colonoscopies between April and November 2019 were retrospectively included. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 2 per segment was considered adequate. Insufficient data, incomplete colonoscopies, and total colectomies were excluded. Two models were tested: model 1 (tricyclic antidepressants, opioids, diabetes, constipation, abdominal surgery, previous inadequate preparation, inpatient status, and American Society of Anesthesiol-ogy [ASA] score 3); model 2 (comorbidities, tricyclic antidepressants, constipation, and abdominal surgery). Results: We included 514 patients (63% males; age 61.7 ± 15.6 years), 441 with adequate preparation. The main indications were inflammatory bowel disease (26.1%) and endoscopic treatment (24.9%). Previous surgery (36.2%) and ASA score ≥3 (23.7%) were the most common comorbidities. An ASA score 3 was the only identified predictor for inadequate preparation in this study (p < 0.001, OR 3.28). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of model 1 were 60.3, 64.2, 21.8, and 90.7%, respectively. Model 2 had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 57.5, 67.4, 22.6, and 90.5%, respectively. The AUC for the ROC curves was 0.62 for model 1, 0.62 for model 2, and 0.65 for the ASA score. Conclusions: Although both models accurately predict adequate bowel preparation, they are still unreliable in predicting inadequate preparation and, as such, new models, or further optimization of current ones, are needed. Utilizing the ASA score might be an appro-priate approximation of the risk for inadequate bowel preparation in tertiary hospital populations. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-04-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052 |
url |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000200052 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.30 n.2 2023 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799137415305101312 |