Hyoscine for polyp detection during colonoscopy: A meta-analysis and systematic review

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in meta-analysis

Ref.	Study type	Blinding	Location	No. of patients	Hyoscine dose	Hyoscine route	Timing of administration
de Brouwer et al[26] 2012	RCT	Double	Netherlands	674	20 mg	IV	Cecal intubation
Byun et al[24] 2009	RCT	Double	NR	205	20 mg	IV	Cecal intubation
Lee et al[17] 2010	RCT	Double	NR	116	20 mg	IV	Cecal intubation
Kim et al[27] 2010	RCT	Double	South Korea	133	20 mg	IM	Premedication
Rondonotti et al[29] 2013	RCT	Double	Italy	402	20 mg	IV	Cecal intubation
Mui et al[28] 2004	RCT	Yes	China	120	40 mg	IV	Premedication
Saunders et al[30] 1996	RCT	Yes	England	56	20 mg	IV	Premedication
Corte et al[25] 2012	RCT	Yes	Australia	601	20 mg	IV	Cecal intubation

RCT: Randomized controlled trial; NR: Not reported.

Table 2 Quality assessment of the studies included in this meta-analysis using Jadad scale

Ref.	Study design	Method of randomization	Double-blind	Method of double-blinding	Description of withdrawals	Total score2
de Brouwer et al[26] 2012	1	1	1	0	1	4
Byun et al[24] 20091	1	0	1	0	1	3
Lee et al[17] 2010	1	1	1	0	1	4
Kim et al[27] 2010	1	0	1	0	1	3
Rondonotti et al[29] 2013	1	1	1	1	1	5
Mui et al[28] 2004	1	1	1	1	1	5
Saunders et al[30] 1996	1	1	1	1	1	5
Corte et al[25] 2012	1	1	1	1	1	5

¹Abstract;

²Jadad Score: 1-5, 5 is excellent and 1 is poor.