Observational Study Open Access
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Oct 25, 2015; 7(15): 1191-1196
Published online Oct 25, 2015. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i15.1191
Unsedation colonoscopy can be not that painful: Evaluation of the effect of “Lamaze method of colonoscopy”
Shao-Ping Yu, Xiao-Dong Lin, Guang-Yao Wu, Song-Hu Li, Zong-Quan Wen, Xiao-Hong Cen, Xian-Guang Huang, Mei-Ting Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China
Author contributions: The study was designed by Yu SP; data were obtained by Lin XD, Wu GY, Li SH, Wen ZQ, Cen XH, Huang XG, Huang MT; endoscopy is performed by Yu SP, Lin XD, Li SH, Wen ZQ and Cen XH; data were analyzed by Wu GY; the report was mainly written by Yu SP, Lin XD and Wu GY; all authors approved the final version.
Supported by The Dongguan science and Technology Bureau, No. 201350715000809.
Institutional review board statement: The Ethics Committee of Dongguan Kanghua Hospital had approved the experiment and all the data and photos used in this manuscript were approved.
Informed consent statement: All study participants, or their legal guardians, provided informed written consent prior to study enrollment.
Conflict-of-interest statement: No conflicts of interest exist.
Data sharing statement: No additional data are available.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: Shao-Ping Yu, MD, Department of Gastroenterology, Dongguan Kanghua Hospital, 1000# Dongguan Avenue, Dongguan 523000, Guangdong Province, China. yushaopingmd@163.com
Telephone: +86-769-23095553 Fax: +86-769-23095553
Received: June 24, 2015
Peer-review started: June 26, 2015
First decision: July 29, 2015
Revised: August 16, 2015
Accepted: September 29, 2015
Article in press: September 30, 2015
Published online: October 25, 2015

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the pain relieving effect of intervention with “Lamaze method of colonoscopy” in the process of colonoscopy.

METHODS: Five hundred and eighty-five patients underwent colonoscopy were randomly divided into three groups, Lamaze group, anesthetic group and control group. Two hundred and twenty-four patients of Lamaze group, the “Lamaze method of colonoscopy” were practiced in the process of colonoscopy. The Lamaze method of colonoscopy is modified from the Lamaze method of childbirth, which helped patients to relieve pain through effective breathing control. One hundred and seventy-eight patients in anesthetic group accepted sedation colonoscopy. For 183 patients in control group, colonoscopy was performed without any intervention. The satisfactory of colon cleaning, intestinal lesions, intubation time, success ratio, pain grading and complications were recorded. All data were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences at base line of the three groups (P > 0.05). Anesthetic group shows advantage in intubation time than the other two groups (P < 0.05). Lamaze group shows no advantage in intubation time than that in control group (P > 0.05). The anesthetic group showed an apparent advantage in relieving pain (P < 0.01). Therefore, the “Lamaze method of colonoscopy” performed in colonoscopy could relieve pain effectively comparing with control group (P < 0.05). The patients in anesthetic group had the highest incidence of complications (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: The performance of the “Lamaze method of colonoscopy” in the process of colonoscopy could relieve patients’ pain, minimize the incidence of complications, and is worthy promotion in clinical practice.

Key Words: Colonoscopy, No sedation, Pain, Lamaze technique

Core tip: Colonoscopy is used as primary investigation of colorectal neoplasm worldwide and is of great value in detection of colorectal cancer in early stage. Though, it is not widely accepted by patients due to the uncomfortable feeling, especially pain, during the process. Recent years, sedation colonoscopy has developed rapidly, it has led to a great promotion of the increase of the patients’ acceptance of follow up examination. Therefore, complication of sedation colonoscopy such as bleeding, perforation, cardiopulmonary events happens once in a while. Some kinds of unsedation colonoscopy had been reported by several scholars. Music, warm water infusion is the two most often reported methods. Here we evaluated the effect of a new method of unsedation colonoscopy we called “the Lamaze method of colonoscopy”(Lamaze colonoscopy) modified from the Lamaze method of childbirth. Our study suggested that Lamaze colonoscopy is an effective way to relief pain during colonoscopy.



INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy plays a big part in primary investigation of colorectal diseases and screening for colorectal neoplasm[1]. Some patients find it difficult to endure the procedure and refuse the follow up examination due to the pain during the procedure. In recent years, the administration of anesthetics during endoscopy introduced by some scholars has achieved extraordinary results[2,3]. Meanwhile, some patients are susceptible to intestinal bleeding, bowel perforation and sedation-related cardiopulmonary adverse reaction due to the loss of pain and throat reflex in anesthesia[4,5].

“The Lamaze method of childbirth”, developed by the French obstetrician Ferdinand Lamaze, has been used to decrease the level of maternal pain during natural birth since late 1950s, and plays a good role in the area[6].Pain during delivery is mainly caused by contraction of uterus. Colonoscopy requires gas infusion during the process, which can stretch the colon like a balloon if gas accumulated; the retroaction against stretching of colon may cause the pain and uncomfortable feeling[7]. The mechanism of pain in childbirth and colonoscopy is similar. We created “The Lamaze method of colonoscopy” (Lamaze colonoscopy), which was modified from “The Lamaze method of childbirth”, and practiced it in the process of colonoscopy. In our study, we verified the effect of Lamaze colonoscopy in reducing pain during colonoscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients

The study included consecutive patients underwent colonoscopy at endoscope center in our hospital from November 2012 to October 2014. The first 3 patients whom underwent sedation colonoscopy were enrolled in anesthetic group every Monday (Monday is our sedation colonoscopy day) except for holidays and those whom needed endoscopic treatment such as polypectomy. The first 3 patients whom underwent unsedation colonoscopy were enrolled in Lamaze group every Tuesday. Those whom needed endoscopic treatment were also ruled out. The first 3 patients whom underwent unsedation colonoscopy were enrolled in control group every Thursday. Those whom needed endoscopic treatment were excluded too. Patients with severe cardiopulmonary dysfunction, stroke, moderate to severe ascites, renal insufficiency, severe malnutrition and patients who were bed ridden were excluded from the study. All patients enrolled in the experiment had signed a consent form of colonoscopy examination. Patients in anesthetic group all signed a consent form of sedation. A total of 585 patients aged from 25-82 years old were enrolled. There were 224 patients in Lamaze group, 178 patients in anesthetic group and 185 patients in control group finally.

Examination

Bowel preparation was routinely accomplished with a 2 L electrolyte solution of polyethylene glycol (all patients were chinese which belongs to yellow race). All patients were given supplemental oxygen intranasal (2 L/min). Heart rate,blood pressure and oxygen saturation were monitored throughout the procedure. Intravenous sedation-analgesics provided by the anesthetist in anesthetic group using a combination of fentanyl (0.5-1 μg/kg) and propofol (1.5-2 mg/kg) at the discretion of the endoscopists. Five doctors with at least 5-years-experience of performing colonoscopy performed the procedure. We began to insert colonoscope when patients fell asleep when their eyelash reflex disappeared, breathed calmly and muscle relaxed. Patients in Lamaze group were trained “the Lamaze method of colonoscopy” (detailed in Table 1), by the assigned nurse in endoscope center, 5-8 min before examination. It would be continuously practiced during the whole process of colonoscopy. The control group was given no intervention. The colonoscopy was categorized as completed when reached the cecum or the ileocolic anastomosis (in case of colonic surgery).

Table 1 Lamaze method of childbirth and the Lamaze method of colonoscopy.
Lamaze method of childbirth[8,9]Thoracic breathing: Used in initial stage of uterus contraction, method: (1) completely relaxed; (2) eyes fixed on a certain point; (3) abdominal stay relaxed while breath in from nose, breath out from mouth; (4) a total of 6-9 times of inspiration and expiration per minute; and (5) practice 5 times a day, 60 s each time
Shallow and slow accelerating breathing: Use when the uterus contracts each 2-4 min, cervix opened to 2-8 cm. Method: Step (1-3) is the same with thoracic breathing; and (4) accelerate the breathing when uterus contraction enhanced, slow it down while contraction relieves
Shallow breathing: Use when the uterus contracts lasts for 60-90 s each 30-90 s , cervix opens to 8-10 cm Method: Step (1-2) is the same with thoracic breathing; (3) open mouth slightly to help breath (making a sound "hee-hee"); (4) breathing with nose, making noise from the larynx; (5) adjust the respiratory rate according to intensity of the contraction; (6) inspiration and expiration the same volume of air to avoid hyperventilation; and (7) 4-6 quickly continue inspiration and expiration then vigorously exhale, repeat until uterus contraction stops
Close air-way and force movement: Used when cervix is full opened to 10 cm. Method: (1) legs apart, hands holding handrail of obstetric delivery bed; (2) vigorously aspirated and close air-way, force down; (3) head up slightly staring at navel with jaw neck down forward; and (4) hold breath for 20-30 s as far as possible, exhale and hold breath at once and force movement until uterus contraction stops
Halitus movement: Used when cannot exert herself but cannot help to do it. Method: (1) mouth open, breathing quickly like gasping; and (2) the whole body is relaxed totally
The Lamaze method of colonoscopyThoracic breathing: Used when the procedure begins, method: (1) completely relaxed; (2) eyes fixed on a certain point; (3) abdominal stay relaxed while breath in from nose, breath out from mouth; and (4) a total of 6-9 times of inspiration and expiration per minute
Shallow and slow accelerating breathing: Used when the scope is crossing the junction of sigmoid colon and descending colon from the sigmoid colon. Method: Step (1-3) is the same with thoracic breathing; and (4) accelerate the breathing when pain enhanced, slow it down while pain relieved
Shallow breathing: Used when the scope is crossing the splenic flexure. Method: (1) completely relaxed; (2) eyes fixed on a certain point; (3) open mouth slightly to help breath (making a sound "hee-hee"); (4) breathing with nose, making noise from the larynx; (5) adjust the respiratory rate according to pain intensity; (6) inspirate and expirate the same volume of air to avoid hyperventilation; and (7) 4-6 quick continue inspirate and expirate then vigorously exhale, repeat until the pain disappear
Close air-way and force movement: Used when the pain is moderate or severe. Method: (1) vigorously aspirated and close air-way, force down; and (2) hold breath for 20-30 s as far as possible, exhale and hold breath at once and force movement until pains relieves or disappeared

The endoscopists graded the quality of bowel preparation immediately after the procedure. Grade 1 as excellent with no stool visualized, Grade 2 as satisfactory with a small amount of stool visualized not blocking the view, Grade 3 as unsatisfactory with stool blocking the view and/or the passage of the colonoscope. He/she also evaluated the difficulty of insertion of the colonoscopy on a 100 mm visual analog scale, with 0 “very easy” and 100 “very difficult.” All patients were asked to finish a questionnaire after the procedure in which they graded abdominal pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 (0 as extremely acceptable/least severe, 10 as least acceptable/extremely severe). Patients marked the point on the line that they feel representing their pain grade. The VAS score is determined by measuring in millimeters from the left hand end of the line to the point that the patient marks.

Equipment and record

Age, gender, history of previous colonoscopy or previous abdominal surgery was recorded before examination. The satisfaction of colon cleaning, intestinal lesions, intubation time,success ratio and complications were also recorded after examination.

Equipment and personnel

Bowel preparation was done in all patients before the examination using 2 L electrolyte solution of polyethylene glycol. Colonoscopy examinations were performed by an experienced endoscopist, using a video colonoscope (FUJINON). Technique assistance is performed by the same assistant when needed during examination. Patients were sedated in presence of an aesthetist. The endoscopists, assistant and nurse received the “Lamaze method of childbirth” course before trial. They were also trained to perform Lamaze colonoscopy using the method above.

Statistical analysis

SPSS 19.0 was used to process data. Quantitative data were reported as means ± SD. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the age and intubation time of the three groups, least-significant difference is used to compare the differences within groups if difference is significant between groups and the test of homogeneity of variances shows P < 0.05. χ2 test was used to compare gender, history of previous colonoscopy, previous abdominal surgery history, intestinal lesions, success ratio and complications. The satisfactory of colon cleaning and the pain grades of the three groups were compared with crosstable Pearson χ2 test. Criterion for statistical significance was P < 0.05.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the three groups in age, gender, history of previous colonoscopy and history of abdominal surgery (Table 2).

Table 2 Comparison on patients’ age, gender, previous colonoscopy history and previous abdominal surgery history.
Age (yr)Gender (male/female)Previous colonoscopy(Y/N)Previous abdominal surgery(Y/N)
Lamaze group54.9 ± 9.9118/10688/13643/181
Anesthetic group55.6 ± 9.776/10262/11625/153
Control group56.3 ± 8.698/8566/11731/152
P0.1970.070.6330.403

According the endoscopists’ finding, there was no difference in the quality of colon cleanliness and the intestinal lesions between the three groups (Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3 Comparison on the quality of bowel cleanliness.
Grade 1Grade 2Grade 3
Lamaze group1683620
Anesthetic group1233817
Control group1372917
Table 4 Comparison on intestinal lesions.
NormalColon polypsColonic diverticulumIBDColon cancer
Lamaze group127691189
Anesthetic group10746997
Control group115398129

The anesthetic group was much more successful in alleviating pain comparing to the other two groups, 57.3% (102/183) of patients feel completely no pain at all. The Lamaze group of colonoscopy is also more efficient in relieving pain than the control group (Tables 5 and 6).

Table 5 Comparison on patients' pain grading.
0-22-44-66-88-10
Lamaze group47967731
Anesthetic group14235100
Control group67718811
Table 6 Further pair-wised comparison of patients’ pain grading.
χ2P
Lamaze group vs control group194.43< 0.001
Lamaze group vs anesthetic group150.92< 0.001
Anesthetic group vs control group310.68< 0.001

The time required for intubation in anesthetic group is shorter than the other two groups. But the Lamaze group did not demonstrate its improvement compared with control group in this aspect (Tables 7 and 8).

Table 7 Comparison on intubation time.
Intubation time (min)
Lamaze group9.21 ± 2.76
Anesthetic group7.46 ± 2.93
Control group9.45 ± 2.38
Table 8 Further pair-wised comparisons on intubation time.
Mean differenceStandard errorP95%CI
Lower boundUpper bound
Lamaze group vs control group-0.2430.2690.368-0.770.29
Lamaze group vs anesthetic group1.750.271< 0.011.222.28
Anesthetic group vs control group-1.9930.285< 0.01-2.55-1.43

Only 1 case failed to complete colonoscopy in anesthetic group, the patient was a thin women who had a previous history of cesarean section. That number in Lamaze group and control group are 7 and 12. But there is no significant difference between the three groups (P = 0.06) (Table 9).

Table 9 Comparison on the quality of bowel cleanliness.
Success(Y/N)
Lamaze group217/7
Anesthetic group177/1
Control group171/12

The complication rates of both the Lamaze group and control group were lower and complication is milder than the anesthetic group. In anesthetic group, 5 patients incurred a decrease of pulse oxygen saturation (< 90%), and 2 of the patients’ heart rate drops to < 60 bpm, but all of them recovered immediately after effective intervention. There were no deaths in all three groups. The difference on complications of the three groups was significant (P = 0.001) (Table 10).

Table 10 Comparison on complications.
TotalBleedingPerforationCardiopulmonary complicationsNormal
Lamaze group224201221
Anesthetic group178907162
Control group183301179
DISCUSSION

Colonoscopy is used as primary investigation of colorectal neoplasm worldwide and is of great value in detection of colorectal cancer in early stage[1]. Though, it is not widely accepted by patients due to the uncomfortable feeling, especially pain, during the process. Recent years, sedation colonoscopy has developed rapidly, it has led to a great promotion of the increase of the patients’ acceptance of follow up examination[10-12]. Therefore, complication of sedation colonoscopy such as bleeding, perforation, cardiopulmonary events happens once in a while[13]. Some kinds of unsedation colonoscopy had been reported by several scholars. Music, warm water infusion is the two most often reported methods[14-16].Here we evaluated the effect of a new method of unsedation colonoscopy we called “the Lamaze method of colonoscopy” (Lamaze colonoscopy) modified from the Lamaze method of childbirth. The Lamaze method of childbirth could reduce pain by effective breathing and relaxation training. Acknowledge of pre-delivery and delivery rule could be applied to different stages and different grades of pain to intentionally control pain caused by contractions and other discomfort feeling. The pain was transferred since mothers focus on breathing control[17]. In our study, we found Lamaze colonoscopy which modifying from “the Lamaze method of childbirth” according to the characteristics of colonoscopy. It was applied to the examination. The results indicated that the pain could be alleviated when use Lamaze colonoscopy. The mechanism of pain during colonoscopy is similar to that of childbirth. Both are caused by the spasm of smooth muscle. But the pain during colonoscopy is artificially caused by the insertion of endoscope. Also, severe pain is caused by the knotting of endoscope during operation. Lamaze colonoscopy may could maintain a relatively constant position of intestinal tract by deepening abdominal respiration, made colonoscope passed easily.

This study compared with the difference of anesthetic group, Lamaze group and control group from several aspects at the same time. Judging from the outcome, the applications of Lamaze colonoscopy did not shorten the time of intubation. The main reason of time increasing is due to the needs of helping patients get into the right step during operation. Considering from the success ratio, the anesthetic group got the highest success ratio, but it did not demonstrate a statistical difference. Too many factors working on the success ratio, research shows that age, gender, preparation of intestine, history of previous abdominal surgery, chronic colitis all contribute to it[18,19]. There is no statistical difference among the three groups in age, gender, preparation of intestine, history of previous abdominal surgery and intestinal lesions.

The usage of sedatives in colonoscopy obviously improves the acceptance and tolerance of the examination in patients. However, some issues still cannot be avoided in anesthetic colonoscopy. Venous channel must be built before the exam, medical fee increased, recovery time was prolonged, complications such as cardiopulmonary events happens. The usage of sedatives can suppress respiratory directly, causing blood pressure drops. Severe allergic reaction can be life threatening, anesthetic colonoscopy causing aspiration pneumonia leads to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) finally caused death is reported in China[20]. In this study, 2 subjects’ heart rate decrease to < 60 beat per minute, 5 subjects’ SPO2 declined to less than 90% in anesthetic group, all those recovered after proper intervention. The incidence rate of complication especially severe complication is lower in Lamaze group and control group than that in anesthetic group. There is some deficiency in our study, the follow-up period is only one week, some delayed complication might be neglected. Some studies expended the follow-up period up to 30 d in accordance with complication[5,21]. This is a single center study, multiple center study using the same standard may provide more evidences of the value of Lamaze colonoscopy.

To sum up, the application of “the Lamaze method of colonoscopy” in colonoscopy can ease the pain of patient effectively, enhance the tolerance of colonoscopy and avoid the adverse effect of anesthetics. This method is worthy of wide promotion, summary and improvement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to Dr. Professor Yang Bai from the Southern Medical University,he reviewed this article, and offered several pieces of professional advice. Professor Jin-Hua Xu, major of statistics from the Ningxia Medical School gave us some suggestions about the data processing. Thanks to Stephen John Rose from London in the United Kingdom for his kind reviewing of the language. He also gave us some nice advice of the language. Here we would like to thank them all for their generous help.

COMMENTS
Background

Colonoscopy plays a big part in primary investigation of colorectal diseases and screening for colorectal neoplasm. Some patients find it difficult to endure the procedure and refuse the follow up examination due to the pain during the procedure. Sedation colonoscopy developed quickly in recent years, but the adverse reaction happens once in a while. Some unsedation colonoscopy had been used to relieve patients’ pain.

Research frontiers

Some kinds of unsedation colonoscopy had been reported by several scholars. Music, warm water infusion is the two most often reported methods. They can all relief pain during unsedation colonoscopy, but not as effect as sedative colonoscopy. New method could be explored.

Innovations and breakthroughs

The use of Lamaze colonoscopy modified from Lamaze childbirth had never been reported. They explored the possibility of it, which is another way of pain-relief in patient undergoes colonoscopy.

Applications

The application of “the Lamaze method of colonoscopy” in colonoscopy can ease the pain of patient effectively, enhance the tolerance of colonoscopy.

Peer-review

The study is interesting and can be very useful in the pain-relief area of study.

Footnotes

P- Reviewer: Amer-Cuenca JJ, Damin DC S- Editor: Tian YL L- Editor: A E- Editor: Jiao XK

References
1.  Burt RW, Barthel JS, Dunn KB, David DS, Drelichman E, Ford JM, Giardiello FM, Gruber SB, Halverson AL, Hamilton SR. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8:8-61.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 28]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28]  [Article Influence: 2.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
2.  Rudner R, Jalowiecki P, Kawecki P, Gonciarz M, Mularczyk A, Petelenz M. Conscious analgesia/sedation with remifentanil and propofol versus total intravenous anesthesia with fentanyl, midazolam, and propofol for outpatient colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:657-663.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 63]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 69]  [Article Influence: 3.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
3.  Campbell L, Imrie G, Doherty P, Porteous C, Millar K, Kenny GN, Fletcher G. Patient maintained sedation for colonoscopy using a target controlled infusion of propofol. Anaesthesia. 2004;59:127-132.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 29]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30]  [Article Influence: 1.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Agostoni M, Fanti L, Gemma M, Pasculli N, Beretta L, Testoni PA. Adverse events during monitored anesthesia care for GI endoscopy: an 8-year experience. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74:266-275.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 106]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 111]  [Article Influence: 8.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Paspatis GA, Vardas E, Theodoropoulou A, Manolaraki MM, Charoniti I, Papanikolaou N, Chroniaris N, Chlouverakis G. Complications of colonoscopy in a large public county hospital in Greece. A 10-year study. Dig Liver Dis. 2008;40:951-957.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 25]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23]  [Article Influence: 1.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Beck NC, Geden EA, Brouder GT. Preparation for labor: a historical perspective. Psychosom Med. 1979;41:243-258.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 16]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17]  [Article Influence: 0.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Loeve AJ, Fockens P, Breedveld P. Mechanical analysis of insertion problems and pain during colonoscopy: why highly skill-dependent colonoscopy routines are necessary in the first place... and how they may be avoided. Can J Gastroenterol. 2013;27:293-302.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
8.  Bayles S Laugh and learn about childbirth. United States: Expect This LLC 2009; 43-50.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
9.  Xiong YF. Introduction and Improvement of the Classical Exercises of the Lamaze Childbirth. Journal of Nursing Science. 2009;24:50.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
10.  Triantafillidis JK, Merikas E, Nikolakis D, Papalois AE. Sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: current issues. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:463-481.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 135]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 143]  [Article Influence: 13.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (3)]
11.  Ko HH, Zhang H, Telford JJ, Enns R. Factors influencing patient satisfaction when undergoing endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:883-891, quiz 891.e1.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 66]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 82]  [Article Influence: 5.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Park CH, Min JH, Yoo YC, Kim H, Joh DH, Jo JH, Shin S, Lee H, Park JC, Shin SK. Sedation methods can determine performance of endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with gastric neoplasia. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:2760-2767.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 37]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 36]  [Article Influence: 3.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Frieling T, Heise J, Kreysel C, Kuhlen R, Schepke M. Sedation-associated complications in endoscopy--prospective multicentre survey of 191142 patients. Z Gastroenterol. 2013;51:568-572.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 18]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16]  [Article Influence: 1.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
14.  Bechtold ML, Puli SR, Othman MO, Bartalos CR, Marshall JB, Roy PK. Effect of music on patients undergoing colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dig Dis Sci. 2009;54:19-24.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 64]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 64]  [Article Influence: 4.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Radaelli F, Paggi S, Amato A, Terruzzi V. Warm water infusion versus air insufflation for unsedated colonoscopy: a randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72:701-709.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 55]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 67]  [Article Influence: 4.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Leung FW. Methods of reducing discomfort during colonoscopy. Dig Dis Sci. 2008;53:1462-1467.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 49]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 50]  [Article Influence: 3.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  Geden E, Beck NC, Brouder G, Glaister J, Pohlman S. Self-report and psychophysiological effects of Lamaze preparation: an analogue of labor pain. Res Nurs Health. 1985;8:155-165.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 7]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9]  [Article Influence: 0.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  Park HJ, Hong JH, Kim HS, Kim BR, Park SY, Jo KW, Kim JW. Predictive factors affecting cecal intubation failure in colonoscopy trainees. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13:5.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 29]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34]  [Article Influence: 3.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Dafnis G, Granath F, Påhlman L, Ekbom A, Blomqvist P. Patient factors influencing the completion rate in colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis. 2005;37:113-118.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 87]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 94]  [Article Influence: 4.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  Liu YL. Report of one case of ARDS caused by aspiration in pain-free colonoscopy. Pain Clin J. 2006;2:162-163.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
21.  Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C, Seeff LC, Manninen DL, Shapiro JA, Schulman J. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:880-886.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 382]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 427]  [Article Influence: 23.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]