UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

WASh multicentre randomised controlled trial: water-assisted sigmoidoscopy in English NHS bowel scope screening

Rutter, MD; Evans, R; Hoare, Z; Von Wagner, C; Deane, J; Esmaily, S; Larkin, T; ... WASh trial team; + view all (2020) WASh multicentre randomised controlled trial: water-assisted sigmoidoscopy in English NHS bowel scope screening. Gut 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321918. (In press). Green open access

[thumbnail of gutjnl-2020-321918.full.pdf]
Preview
Text
gutjnl-2020-321918.full.pdf - Published Version

Download (434kB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives: The English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme invites 55 year olds for a sigmoidoscopy (Bowel Scope Screening (BSS)), aiming to resect premalignant polyps, thus reducing cancer incidence. A national patient survey indicated higher procedural pain than anticipated, potentially impacting on screening compliance and effectiveness. We aimed to assess whether water-assisted sigmoidoscopy (WAS), as opposed to standard CO2 technique, improved procedural pain and detection of adenomatous polyps. Design: The WASh (Water-Assisted Sigmoidoscopy) trial was a multicentre, single-blind, randomised control trial for people undergoing BSS. Participants were randomised to either receive WAS or CO2 from five sites across England. The primary outcome measure was patient-reported moderate/severe pain, as assessed by patients on a standard Likert scale post procedure prior to discharge. The key secondary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). The costs of each technique were also measured. Results: 1123 participants (50% women, mean age 55) were randomised (561 WAS, 562 CO2 ). We found no difference in patient-reported moderate/severe pain between WAS and CO2 (14% in WAS, 15% in CO2; p=0.47). ADR was 15% in the CO2 arm and 11% in the WAS arm (p=0.03); however, it remained above the minimum national performance standard in both arms. There was no statistical difference in mean number of adenomas nor overall polyp detection rate. There was negligible cost difference between the two techniques. Conclusion: In the context of enema-prepared unsedated screening sigmoidoscopies performed by screening-accredited endoscopists, no difference in patient-reported pain was seen when using either a CO2 or WAS intubation technique. Trial registration number: ISRCTN81466870

Type: Article
Title: WASh multicentre randomised controlled trial: water-assisted sigmoidoscopy in English NHS bowel scope screening
Location: England
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321918
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321918
Language: English
Additional information: his is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute of Epidemiology and Health
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute of Epidemiology and Health > Behavioural Science and Health
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10109949
Downloads since deposit
39Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item