Skip to content

Effect of low-volume (1L) vs high-volume (2L) bowel preparation on cost-effectiveness and quality of life (RESULT study). A multicenter randomized controlled trial

Effect of low-volume (1L) vs high-volume (2L) bowel preparation on cost-effectiveness and quality of life (RESULT study). A multicenter randomized controlled trial - RESULT

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON52176
Enrollment
470
Registered
2022-02-16
Start date
2022-05-10
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-04-15

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

bowel cancer Colorectal cancer

Interventions

Patients will be randomized during the pre-colonoscopy hospital visit between a specialized low-volume 1-liter bowel preparation fluid (Pleinvue) and an high-volume 2-liter bowel preparation fluid (

Sponsors

Radboud Universitair Medisch Centrum
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: • Age > 18 years • Planned elective colonoscopy for screening or diagnostic indications

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: • Therapeutic colonoscopy (e.g. endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) • History of (sub) total colectomy • Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) • Inpatient status • Indication for an intensified bowel preparation regime • Emergency colonoscopy • Limited Dutch language skills • Dementia • Visual impairment • Commonly accepted contra-indications for non-iso osmotic bowel preparation and ascorbate: o Glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency o (sub)ileus o Bowel obstruction or perforation o Acute abdomen o Gastroparesis o intolerance for any of the formulations ingredients o Severe renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Main endpoints are BBPS result (total and per segment), and proportion of adequately prepared patients per type of bowel preparation.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Secondary endpoints include: the absolute score SF-36 and EQ-5D-5L before and after bowel preparation, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), in terms of costs per QALYs, correlation of the clinical parameters and tolerability to QoL scores, total individual costs, treating physician advised surveillance interval per study arm, and subgroup differences for colonoscopy indication and prior experience with bowel preparation.

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)