The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inadequate preparation of the bowel for colonoscopy can result in both missed pathological lesions and cancelled procedures. We looked prospectively at the quality of colonic preparation and evaluated potential associations between specific patient characteristics and inadequate colonic preparation. METHODS: Data were gathered on consecutive patients presenting for colonoscopy who received either a polyethylene glycol lavage or oral sodium phosphate bowel preparation. Patient demographic and medical history information was gathered before scheduled colonoscopy. The endoscopist evaluated the preparation quality during the procedure. Complete data were gathered on 649 of 714 eligible patients (90.8%). Possible predictors of inadequate colonic preparation were analyzed using univariate statistics and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: An inadequate colonic preparation was reported in 21.7% of observed colonoscopies. Only 18% of patients with an inadequate colonic preparation reported a failure to adequately follow preparation instructions. A later colonoscopy starting time, a reported failure to follow preparation instructions, inpatient status, a procedural indication of constipation, taking tricyclic antidepressants, male gender, and a history of cirrhosis, stroke or dementia were all independent predictors of an inadequate colon preparation (all p < 0.05). A procedural indication of previous polypectomy was a negative predictor of inadequate colonic preparation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Several patient characteristics were significantly associated with colonic preparation quality independent of preparation type, compliance with preparation instructions, and procedure starting time. This information may help to identify patients at an increased risk for inadequate colonic preparation for whom alternative preparation protocols would be appropriate.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Colon capsule endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline
Spada, C., Hassan, C., Galmiche, J., Neuhaus, H., Dumonceau, J., Adler, S., Epstein, O., Gay, G., Pennazio, M., Rex, D., et al. (2012) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1291717 · Cited by 287
Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy
BELSEY, J., EPSTEIN, O., & HERESBACH, D. (2007) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03212.x · Cited by 259
Bessissow, T., Van Keerberghen, C.-A., Van Oudenhove, L., Ferrante, M., Vermeire, S., Rutgeerts, P., & Van Assche, G. (2013) · Journal of Crohn's and Colitis · doi:10.1016/j.crohns.2013.04.011 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Ness, R.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Gastroenterology
- Published
- 2001-06
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1797-1802
- ISSN
- 0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2040626441
- Cited by
- 473
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)02437-6
- The paper
- Ness, R. (2001). Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The American Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)02437-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.