1 / 56

Diabetic Colon Preparation for GI Procedure

Diabetic Colon Preparation for GI Procedure. Ann Hayes BSN, RN, CGRN Marti Buffum DNSc , RN, PMHCNS-BC Joyce Hughes MS, RN, CGRN Veterans Affairs Medical Center San Francisco. Background. Colon cancer second leading cause death from a cancer in North America

branxton
Télécharger la présentation

Diabetic Colon Preparation for GI Procedure

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Diabetic Colon Preparation for GI Procedure Ann Hayes BSN, RN, CGRN Marti Buffum DNSc, RN, PMHCNS-BC Joyce Hughes MS, RN, CGRN Veterans Affairs Medical Center San Francisco

  2. Background • Colon cancer second leading cause death from a cancer in North America • 150,000 colon cancer diagnosed per year • Totally preventable

  3. Colonoscopy • Increasingly used for screening • Adequate bowel prep significant for GI units and patients

  4. Clinical Problem • Inadequate colon preparation means repeat procedure • Colonoscopy has potential risks • Bleeding and perforation • Sedation complications: • Cardiac • respiratory

  5. Required bowel cleansing • Day prior to procedure • Wide variety of colon preps • Patients often complain about prep

  6. Preventing repeat procedure • Decreases availability of colon screening • Maximizes patient safety • Ensures organizational efficiency

  7. Clinical Problem in GI unit • 1997 Survey of 64 patients colonoscopy preps 19% had good preps 81% poor prep means repeat exam • GI nursing staff began QI project to improve patient care by improving colon preps

  8. Nursing Interventions to Improve Colon Preps • Improve patient education • Phone call week prior to procedure

  9. 2001 Survey • 50 colon preps = 79% good to excellent • But diabetic colon preps = only 63% good New finding!!

  10. Prep Survey • Suggests diabetic patients having more difficulty attaining adequate colon prep • Needs to improve / change the way diabetic patients are prepped

  11. Are diabetics different? • Need to do a literature review • Found no colon prep studies with diabetic

  12. Literature review • Nakahara et al., (2002) • Gastroparesis: slow emptying of stomach • Well known in medicine • Causes nausea and often vomiting

  13. Literature • Taylor & Schubert (2001) diabetic patients prepped significantly less effective prep • Using PEG solution for colonoscopy • 17 of 45 diabetic patients had inadequate colon prep

  14. Literature • Fincher et al (1999) : preps for sigmoidoscopy less likely to be adequate • Study of 299 • Regardless of which 3 preps used, diabetics less likely to have adequate prep

  15. Literature review • Study by Maleki et al., (1998): significantly slower colonic transit times • Ascending and transverse colon slower • Study by Celik et al., (2001) • Constipation a problem for 2/3 diabetics

  16. Special Needs of Diabetic • Approach to colon prep in diabetic patients needs to be different • Need to change standard prep used

  17. PEG Solution • Polyethylene glycol-based isotonic salt solution • Davis et, al 1980 • Safest and most commonly used

  18. Sodium Phosphate Solution • Low volume, strong laxative • Associated with dangerous fluid & electrolyte shifts • FDA issued a warning

  19. Magnesium Citrate (Mg) • Study by Berkelhammer 2002 showed Mg citrate milder, low volume laxative • Minimizes electrolyte imbalance, dehydration & aphthous ulcers • Sodium phosphate solution = 5.5% ulcers • Mg = 1% ulcers • Significant finding: p< 0.01

  20. Mg Citrate • Aphthous ulcers lead to diagnosis confusion • Could be: IBD, ischemic colitis or infection

  21. Mg Citrate • Available over the counter & low cost • Minimal fluid and electrolyte shift • Fewer incident aphthous ulcers

  22. Mg Citrate & Electrolytes • Sharma et, al 2001 study showed: • No significant shifts in BP, pulse and electrolytes • Mg citrate safe & effective for colon cleansing

  23. Usual Reaction to failed colon prep • Repeat colonoscopy • Double PEG = 8 liters

  24. Double Prep Problem • Diabetics have slow gastric emptying • Would have difficult consuming large volumes • Possible vomiting and non adherence

  25. Constipation Problem • Large percentage of diabetic are constipated • Need to correct this prior to starting colon prep

  26. Decision Process • Conferred with Dr McQuaid, Chief GIDC • Tried new prep on small group with good success

  27. Standard Colon Prep • Clear liquids day prior to colonoscopy • Late afternoon: • 10 oz Mg citrate • 4 liters PEG

  28. New Diabetic Colon Prep • All patients have clear liquid diet day prior • Diabetics: two days prior to exam 10oz. Mg citrate • All patients: day before test, 10oz Mg citrate and 4 liters PEG

  29. Research Question • Will new colon prep two 10oz Mg citrate (1 day apart) & 4 liters PEG solution improve diabetic prep over original prep 10oz Mg citrate and 4 liters PEG solution?

  30. Method • Design: Experimental design • Randomized controlled trial • Double blinded: physician-nurse team and patient

  31. Conducted at GIDC • University-affiliated VA Medical Center • IRB approval form University of California and VA Research Committee • 200 subjects

  32. Procedure • Consent • Randomization: random table of numbers • Blinded procedure staff • Patient drinks one of two preps: experimental or standard

  33. Instruments • Demographic Information • Age • Sex • Use of narcotics • Years of being diabetic • Signs of peripheral or retinal neuropathy • Serum creatinine

  34. Instruments • Patient Questionnaire • Which prep consumed? • How much was consumed? • How long it took to consume ?

  35. Instruments • Colon cleansing scale • Used by GI staff since 1998 • Adams et al., (1994) • Scale of 1 to 5 • 1 = very clear of feces • 5 = solid stool, aborted procedure • Colon rated at cecum, consensus between nurse and endoscopist

  36. Inclusion Criteria • Outpatient colonoscopy • Diabetic • English speaking

  37. Exclusion Criteria • Dementia • Psychosis • Prior colon surgery

  38. Procedures • Recruitment: all diabetic outpatients being scheduled for colonoscopy • Consented patients • Select randomizedenvelope (table of random numbers)

  39. Procedure • Give prep and instructions: standard or experimental • All patients received verbal and written instructions from GI RN

  40. Procedures Continued • Day of procedure: admitting nurse completes demographics • MD and patient (blinded): completed colon prep evaluation during colonoscopy

  41. Study Results: Demographics • Mean age 62 years • Men 187; women 8 • IDDM = 53; NIDDM = 143 • Demographics not significantly different between the two groups

  42. Study Results • Good colon prep: • Diabetic (experimental) prep = 70% Standard prep = 54% • Chi-square = 5.14 • P = 0.02 • Diabetic patients who used Diabetic prep had significantly cleaner colon

  43. Percent of Patients for Whom Colon was Easily Visualized Chi-square = 5.14, p=0.02

  44. Percent of Patients Who Drank 4 Liters of PEG as Directed p=.96, NS

  45. Conclusion • Diabetic patients having a colonoscopy will get better colon cleansing if given 10 oz Mg citrate two days prior to procedure then 10 oz Mg citrate and 4 liters PEG the day prior to procedure • Other GI procedure units could confidently implement this prep for diabetic patients

  46. Practice Change • Diabetic prep routinely for all diabetic patients scheduled for colonoscopy • Expanding the use of this prep to patients with constipation and those who had inadequately cleans colon on past colonoscopy

  47. Diabetes Serious & Common Problem in US • 2008: 8% (24 million) • 2010 increase to 15% • Veterans 20% in 2000 • Most are 60 years and older

More Related