The Timing of Bowel Preparation Is More Important than the Timing of Colonoscopy in Determining the Quality of Bowel Cleansing

Aims  

We aimed to compare the quality of bowel preparation and cecal intubation rates between morning and afternoon colonoscopies and to evaluate the difference in quality of bowel preparation according to the intervals between starting and ending intake of bowel preparation agent and the initiation of colonoscopy.     

Maximizing the general success of cecal intubation during propofol sedation in a multi-endoscopist academic centre

Background  

Achieving the target of 95% colonoscopy completion rate at centres conducting colorectal screening programs is an important issue. Large centres and teaching hospitals employing endoscopists with different levels of training and expertise risk achieving worse results. Deep sedation with propofol in routine colonoscopy could maximize the results of cecal intubation.     

Hood Colonoscopy in Trainees: A Useful Adjunct to Improve the Performance

Background

The use of a transparent hood to improve colonoscopic performance has recently been proposed.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether using the hood might improve the cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, number of attempts needed to intubate the ileo-cecal valve, and polyp detection rate in trainees.

Methods

Patients undergoing colonoscopy (n = 378) were randomized in two groups, one studied with hood colonoscopy (n = 179) and the other (n = 199) with standard examination.

Results

No differences were found between hood and standard colonoscopy with respect to cecal intubation rate (95 vs 92 %), whereas hood colonoscopy significantly shortened the cecal intubation time, the number of attempts needed to intubate the ileo-cecal valve, and the overall polyp detection rate (p < 0.01 for all these variables).

Conclusions

Hood colonoscopy might represent a useful adjunct to standard colonoscopy, especially improving the performance of endoscopic trainees.     

Comparison of Single- Versus Double-Balloon Assisted-Colonoscopy for Colon Examination After Previous Incomplete Standard Colonoscopy

Background

Colonoscopy fails to achieve cecal intubation in 5–10 % of cases. Many of these cases can be completed using balloon-assisted colonoscopy, either with the single-balloon colonoscopy (SBC) or the double-balloon colonoscopy (DBC) techniques.

Aim

To compare the completion rates of SBC and DBC in patients with previous incomplete conventional colonoscopy.

Methods

Between August 2009 and July 2011 either SBC or DBC was performed in 53 patients in whom previous conventional colonoscopy did not achieve cecal intubation. The medical records of these 53 patients were reviewed retrospectively for details regarding (1) indication for the initial colonoscopy, (2) patient characteristics, (3) data from the initial colonoscopy, and (4) details on both SBC and DBC.

Results

SBC was successful in intubating the cecum in 100 % (26/26) of patients and DBC was successful in 93 % (25/27) of patients. The median (range) time to reach the cecum was 17 (9–43) min in the SBC group and 20 (7–58) min in the DBC group (P = 0.37). The presence of polyps was an entirely new finding in 35 % (9/26) of patients in the SBC group and 30 % (8/27) of patients in DBC group. Therapeutics were performed in 73 % (19/26) of patients in SBC group and 67 % (18/27) of patients in DBC group.

Conclusion

For patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy, SBC and DBC offer high cecal intubation rates as well as detection of additional polyps and therapeutic capability. Either SBC or DBC can be considered after incomplete conventional colonoscopy.     

Relationship of Colonoscopy Completion Rates and Endoscopist Features

The success rate for reaching the cecum has been widely discussed as an indicatorof technical expertise for colonoscopy. However, few studies have addressed the impact of endoscopist-specific parameters on cecal intubation rates. The aim of this study wasto characterize the relationship between endoscopist-specific parameters (age, gender, experience level, annual procedure volume, insertion and withdrawal times) and cecal intubation rates for colonoscopy. Procedural data from all colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists at the outpatient endoscopy unit of Rochester Methodist Hospital, Minnesota, between January and December 2003 were reviewed. Procedural data of 45 endoscopists who performed 17,100 colonoscopies over the study period were analyzed. The average cecal intubation rate was 93.9% (SD, 2.9%). Higher experience level (> 9 years [median]) was significantly predictive of a cecal intubation rate > 94% (OR = 3.43; 95% CI, 1.03–12.29; P = 0.04). Although higher procedure volume was not predictive of higher colonoscopy completion rates overall, when analysis was confined to the junior faculty members (< 5 years experience), completion rates for those endoscopists doing > 200 per year (92.5%) was significantly higher than for those doing < 200 per year (88.5%; P = 0.04). Our observations suggest that cecal intubation rates increase with increasing endoscopist experience. Moreover, among junior endoscopists, an annual volume of at least 200 procedures appears to be required to maintain adequate competence. Future prospective studies should provide data to support consensus guidelines recommending minimum annual procedure numbers required for maintenance of endoscopic competence among trained endoscopists.     

Usefulness of Warm Water and Oil Assistance in Colonoscopy by Trainees

Background and Study Aims

Success rate of cecal intubation, endoscopist’s difficulty, and procedure-related patient pain are still problems for beginners performing colonoscopy. New methods to aid colonoscopic insertion such as warm water instillation and oil lubrication have been proposed. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of using warm water or oil in colonoscopy.

Methods

Colonoscopy was performed in 117 unsedated patients by three endoscopists-in-training. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups, using a conventional method with administration of antispasmodics, warm water instillation, and oil lubrication, respectively. Success rate of total intubation within time limit (15 min), cecal intubation time, degree of endoscopist’s difficulty, and level of patient discomfort were compared among the three groups.

Results

Cecal intubation time was shorter in the warm water group than in the conventional and oil groups. Degree of procedural difficulty was lower in the warm water group, and patient pain score was higher in the oil lubrication group, compared with the other groups. However, there was no significant difference in success rate of intubation within time limit among the three groups.

Conclusions

The warm water method is a simple, safe, and feasible method for beginners. Oil lubrication may not be a useful method compared with conventional and warm water method.     

Effect of hysterectomy on colonoscopy completion rate

BACKGROUND:

Several studies show that colonoscopies are technically more difficult to perform in women than men, especially in women who have undergone abdominal and gynecological surgeries. A review of the literature indicates an increased rate of noncompletion of colonoscopies in most cases; however, no studies have investigated the procedural complication rate, sedation requirements and perception of pain in colonoscopies.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether women who have undergone a previous hysterectomy have a higher noncompletion rate when undergoing a colonoscopy, and to assess whether there is a higher percentage of complications. Furthermore, the present study also aimed to ascertain whether these women required more sedation and whether their perception of pain is greater than that of women who did not undergo previous abdominal surgeries.

METHODS:

The present study was a prospective cohort study of women, 45 to 80 years of age, who underwent colonoscopy (n=508). A total of 229 patients were eligible for the study; they completed a questionnaire, and were subsequently divided into control and hysterectomy groups. Gastroenterologists performed all procedures. After colonoscopy, the patient and endoscopist completed a pain perception questionnaire. Cecal intubation rates were also recorded.

RESULTS:

No significant difference for cecal intubation rates were detected between the two groups (95.7% and 98.7% in hysterectomy and control groups, respectively; P=0.176). The crude OR for the success rate was 0.29 (95% CI 0.05 to 1.90). There was no significant difference between groups regarding sedation or the type of colonoscope. No correlation between the gastroenterologists’ evaluation of pain and patients’ pain was observed.

CONCLUSION:

Hysterectomy did not significantly diminish the cecal intubation rate, and there was no detectable difference in pain perception or sedative dose. Colonoscopy remains an excellent screening and diagnostic tool for all women.     

Prone Positioning of Obese Patients for Colonoscopy Results in Shortened Cecal Intubation Times: A Randomized Trial

Background

Obesity is a risk factor for colorectal cancer, and colonoscopy can be technically challenging in obese patients. It has been proposed (with little supporting data) that prone positioning of obese patients might facilitate a difficult colonoscopy.

Aim

The aim of this study was to determine if starting colonoscopy in the prone position for obese patients decreases cecal intubation times.

Methods

This was a prospective, randomized study conducted at the North Texas VA Medical Center. Patients with a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m² undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to either initial prone positioning or standard, left-lateral positioning. The outcome measurements were cecal intubation time, frequency of repositioning, sedative medications used, reports of pain, complications, and procedure tolerability.

Results

Fifty patients were randomized to have colonoscopy starting in the standard, left-lateral decubitus position, and 51 to the prone position. The average cecal intubation time for the standard group was 550 vs. 424 s in the prone group (p = 0.03). Patient repositioning was used in 28 % of patients in the standard group versus 8 % in the prone group (p = 0.009). There was no difference in subjective reports of pain between groups (p = 0.95) or in average pain scores (p = 0.79). Follow-up interviews were conducted in 93 % of patients, all of whom said that they would be willing to have repeat colonoscopy in the same position.

Conclusions

Performance of colonoscopy in the prone position for obese patients results in significantly shorter cecal intubation times and decreased need for patient repositioning. Prone positioning is well accepted and does not significantly increase procedure-related discomfort.     

Variation in Colonoscopic Technique and Adenoma Detection Rates at an Academic Gastroenterology Unit

The purpose of this research is to evaluate the quality of colonoscopy at an academic institution with a focus on factors influencing withdrawal times and adenoma detection rates. Procedural data and pathologic results of 550 consecutive screening colonoscopies in average risks patients (mean [±SD] age, 57 ± 7.6, 44% male) completed by ten academic gastroenterologists were reviewed. Per individual gastroenterologist, the adenoma detection rates ranged widely from 0.09 to 0.82 adenomas per patient with a mean of 0.46 for the group. The mean withdrawal time was 7.0 min for the group and ranged from 3.4 to 9.6 min. There was a significant positive relationship between the number of adenomas detected and the withdrawal time (P = 0.006). Endoscopists with cecal intubation time to withdrawal time ratios of less than 1 detected significantly more adenomas compared to endoscopists with ratios greater than 1 (P = 0.001). (1) Significant variation in academic gastroenterologists’ abilities to detect adenomas during screening colonoscopies exists. (2) Colonoscopic withdrawal time and the cecal intubation to withdrawal time ratio are important factors associated with increased adenoma detection rates.     

Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: an analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital

BACKGROUND: Despite increased emphasis on endoscopic performance indicators, e.g., cecal intubation rates, limited data from actual clinical practice have been published. OBJECTIVES: Retrospective database review to determine the rate and documentation of cecal intubation during colonoscopy at the University of Maryland Medical Center. METHODS: We reviewed 5,477 consecutive colonoscopies performed by 10 faculty gastroenterologists at a University hospital over a 6-yr period (March 1, 1999 to February 28, 2005). Unadjusted cecal intubation rates were analyzed as were rates that were adjusted based on the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer recommendations. We analyzed trends in overall and individual cecal intubation rates, circumstances that impact these rates, and the quality of documentation of cecal intubation. RESULTS: The overall adjusted cecal intubation rate for the entire 6 yr was 90.3%, and increased over the study period with the highest adjusted rate (93.7%) in the most recent year studied. There was no correlation between cecal intubation rate and patient age, gastroenterology fellow involvement, or endoscopist experience and number of procedures/year. In contrast, colon cancer screening, male gender, outpatient colonoscopy, and adequate bowel preparation predicted a higher cecal intubation rate. Written and photographic documentation of cecal intubation improved significantly after 2002. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed cecal intubation and documentation rates that meet current guidelines, and identified factors that may cause substantial variance in these rates depending on the nature of the practice. The present analysis confirms that computerized databases can be used to assess individual and group cecal intubation and documentation rates on an annual basis, and to make these data available to the public.     

Factors that influence cecal intubation rate during colonoscopy in deeply sedated patients

Background and Aim: The technical performance of colonoscopy performed in deeply sedated patients differs from that performed without sedation or under minimal to moderate sedation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors affecting cecal intubation during colonoscopy performed under deep sedation. Methods: A total of 5352 consecutive subjects who underwent a screening colonoscopy as part of a health check‐up between January 2008 and December 2008 at an academic hospital were reviewed. All endoscopies were performed with deep sedation using combination propofol or propofol alone. Data collected included characteristics of the patients (age, gender, body mass index, bowel habits, history of abdominal or pelvic surgery, quality of bowel preparation, and presence/absence of colonic diverticula) and characteristics of the colonoscopists (experience level, colonoscopy procedure volume, and instrument handling method). These factors were analyzed to evaluate their impact on cecal intubation rates. Results: The crude cecal intubation rate was 98% and the adjusted cecal intubation rate was 98.3%. The mean cecal intubation time was 5.6 ± 3.2 min. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patient age greater than 60 years, constipation, poor colon preparation and a two‐person colonoscopy procedure were independently associated with lower cecal intubation rates. Conclusions: Colonoscopy performed under deep sedation by experienced colonoscopists results in high cecal intubation rates. Among the significant patient‐related predictors influencing the cecal intubation, the quality of the bowel preparation was the only modifiable factor. When performed by experienced hands, the one‐person method was associated with higher cecal intubation rates than the two‐person method.     

Comparison of Colonoscopy Quality Measures Across Various Practice Settings and the Impact of Performance Scorecards

Background

Quality performance measures for screening colonoscopy vary among endoscopists. The impact of practice setting is unknown.

Aims

We aimed to (1) compare screening colonoscopy performance measures among three different US practice settings; (2) evaluate factors associated with adenoma detection; and (3) assess a scorecard intervention on performance metrics.

Methods

This multi-center prospective study compared patient, endoscopist, and colonoscopy characteristics performed at a tertiary care hospital (TCH), community-based hospital (CBH), and private practice group (PPG). Withdrawal times (WT), cecal intubation, and adenoma detection rates (ADR) were compared by site at baseline and 12 weeks following scorecard distribution. Generalized linear mixed models identified factors associated with adenoma detection.

Results

Twenty-eight endoscopists performed colonoscopies on 1987 asymptomatic, average-risk individuals ≥50 years. Endoscopist and patient characteristics were similar across sites. The PPG screened more men (TCH: 42.8%, CBH: 45.0%, PPG: 54.2%; p < 0.0001). Preparation quality varied with good/excellent results in 70.6, 88.3, and 92% of TCH, CBH, and PPG cases, respectively (p < 0.0001). Male ADRs, cecal intubation, and WT exceeded recommended benchmarks despite variable results at each site; female ADRs were <15% at the PPG which screened the fewest females. Performance remained unchanged following scorecard distribution. Adenoma detection was associated with increasing patient age, male gender, WT, adequate preparation, but not practice setting.

Conclusions

Each practice performed high-quality screening colonoscopy. Scorecards did not improve performance metrics. Preparation quality varies among practice settings and can be modified to improve adenoma detection.

     

Endoscopic management of failed colonoscopy in clinical practice: to change endoscopist, instrument, or both?

Background and aims  

Caecal intubation fails up to 20% of colonoscopy in clinical practice. We aimed to assess whether (1) in patients with a prior incomplete colonoscopy with a standard adult colonoscope, a subsequent caecal intubation may be achieved with the same instrument; (2) there are factors predicting a repeated unsuccessful colonoscopy; and (3) how frequently completion can be further achieved by shifting to a standard gastroscope.     

Water infusion versus air insufflation for colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine whether water infusion colonoscopy (WIC) is a more effective diagnostic tool than standard air insufflation colonoscopy (AIC).

Methods

All articles pertinent to a comparison of water-related methods and air insufflation to facilitate insertion of the colonoscope were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Pooling results were derived by using the Review Manager Software. Outcomes were assessed using the weighted mean difference (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for continuous variables and the odds ratios (OR) with 95 % CI for dichotomous variables.

Results

Eighteen studies involving 2,797 patients were included. WIC was associated with a significantly higher cecal intubation rate than AIC (OR = 1.90; 95 % CI 1.21–2.99; p = 0.005). The intubation time was similar for the two types of colonoscopy, but in WIC there was a significantly lower visual analog scale score for abdominal pain than in AIC (MD = ?1.30; 95 % CI ?2.03 to ?0.58; p < 0.001) without sacrificing the polyp detection rate (OR = 1.17; 95 % CI 0.78–1.77; p = 0.44). Statistically, the patient’s willingness to repeat colonoscopy was significantly greater for WIC than for AIC (OR = 1.74; 95 % CI 1.14–2.67; p < 0.01). Furthermore, in the subgroup for trainees, the WIC group achieved a higher cecal intubation rate (OR = 1.83; 95 % CI 1.15–2.93; p = 0.01) and a shorter intubation time (MD = ?1.72 min; 95 % CI ?3.34 to ?0.11; p = 0.04) than the AIC group.

Conclusions

In contrast to AIC, WIC improved cecal intubation, alleviated abdominal pain, and increased patients’ willingness to repeat the procedure.     

Benefits and Limitations of Cap-Fitted Colonoscopy in Screening Colonoscopy

Background

Colonoscopy is widely used to detect colorectal cancer and to remove precancerous lesions to reduce the risk of colonic cancer.

Aims

To examine the benefits and limitations of cap-fitted colonoscopy compared to conventional colonoscopy in terms of technical performance and colorectal adenoma detection rate.

Methods

Screening colonoscopies performed from 2009 to 2010 with or without a transparent cap were retrospectively examined to compare the rate of successful intubation, cecal intubation time, and number, size, shape, and location of adenomas detected. An inclusion criterion was visualization of >95 % of the right colon.

Results

Data from 2,301 colonoscopies (1,165 with cap-fitted colonoscopy, 1,136 without the transparent cap) were retrospectively analyzed. Procedures were performed by four experienced endoscopists. The subjects’ demographic characteristics and technical performances were similar between the two methods. The only significant difference in the technical performance between the two techniques was a shorter cecal intubation time with cap-fitted colonoscopy (5.3 vs. 6.6 min; p = 0.045) by one endoscopist. The total number of adenomas detected was significantly higher with cap-fitted colonoscopy than without the cap (586 vs. 484, respectively; p < 0.0001). Adenoma detection with cap-fitted endoscopy was significantly higher in the right colon than in the left colon (19 vs. 12 %, respectively; p = 0.0001).

Conclusion

Cap-fitted colonoscopy did not improve the technical aspects of colonoscopy but significantly increased adenoma detection, especially in the right colon. It did not increase the detection rate of flat or depressed adenomas.     

Quality indicators in pediatric colonoscopy: an Australian tertiary center experience

Objectives: Quality indicators for colonoscopy in adults are largely driven by colorectal cancer screening, and include cecal intubation rates, with rates of >90% recommended. In contrast, colorectal cancer is rare in childhood, with paucity of data on relevant quality indicators for pediatric colonoscopy. It is also unclear whether high rates of cecal intubation are achievable in small children. Our aim was to audit all colonoscopies performed in a tertiary pediatric center to examine clinical indications for procedure, completeness of examination with cecal and ileal intubation, significant findings, and complications.

Methods: Retrospective review of colonoscopies performed between November 2011 and October 2015 was undertaken.

Results: Total colonoscopy was performed in 652 patients, 53% male, with median age 13.0 (range 0.4–18.2) years. The most common indications for colonoscopy were assessment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) 57.9% (378/652), rectal bleeding 10% (68/652) and abdominal pain 10% (68/652). Trainees performed 69.8% (452/652) of procedures. Quality of bowel preparation was mentioned in 63% (410/652), of which 22% (90/410) were considered inadequate. Cecal intubation rate was 96.3% (628/652) and ileal intubation rate was 92.4% (603/652). Extent of procedure was confirmed in 99.2% of patients with photographs and/or ileal biopsy. Poor quality of bowel preparation (p?=?.001) and age <5years (p?=?.007) were inversely related to successful ileal intubation.

Conclusions: High rates of cecal and ileal intubation are achievable in pediatric colonoscopy. Ileal intubation should be considered a quality indicator since the main indicator for pediatric colonoscopy is to investigate IBD.     

Point-of-care, peer-comparator colonoscopy practice audit: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Quality Program--Endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care practice audits allow documentation of procedural outcomes to support quality improvement in endoscopic practice.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a colonoscopists’ practice audit tool that provides point-of-care data collection and peer-comparator feedback.

METHODS

A prospective, observational colonoscopy practice audit was conducted in academic and community endoscopy units for unselected patients undergoing colonoscopy. Anonymized colonoscopist, patient and practice data were collected using touchscreen smart-phones with automated data upload for data analysis and review by participants. The main outcome measures were the following colonoscopy quality indicators: colonoscope insertion and withdrawal times, bowel preparation quality, sedation, immediate complications and polypectomy, and biopsy rates.

RESULTS

Over a span of 16 months, 62 endoscopists reported on 1279 colonoscopy procedures. The mean cecal intubation rate was 94.9% (10th centile 84.2%). The mean withdrawal time was 8.8 min and, for nonpolypectomy colonoscopies, 41.9% of colonoscopists reported a mean withdrawal time of less than 6 min. Polypectomy was performed in 37% of colonoscopies. Independent predictors of polypectomy included the following: endoscopy unit type, patient age, interval since previous colonoscopy, bowel preparation quality, stable inflammatory bowel disease, previous colon polyps and withdrawal time. Withdrawal times of less than 6 min were associated with lower polyp removal rates (mean difference −11.3% [95% CI −2.8% to −19.9%]; P=0.01).

DISCUSSION

Cecal intubation rates exceeded 90% and polypectomy rates exceeded 30%, but withdrawal times were frequently shorter than recommended. There are marked practice variations consistent with previous observations.

CONCLUSION

Real-time, point-of-care practice audits with prompt, confidential access to outcome data provide a basis for targeted educational programs to improve quality in colonoscopy practice.     

Comparison of blind intubation through the I-gel and ILMA Fastrach by nurses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A manikin study

Objectives

To investigate whether nursing staff can successfully use the I-gel and the intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach (ILMA) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Background

Although tracheal intubation is considered to be the optimal method for securing the airway during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, laryngoscopy requires a high level of skill.

Methods

Forty five nurses inserted the I-gel and the ILMA in a manikin, with continuous and without chest compressions.

Results

Mean intubation times for the ILMA and I-gel without chest compressions were 20.60 ± 3.27 and 18.40 ± 3.26 s, respectively (p < 0.0005). ILMA proved more successful than the I-gel regardless of compressions. Continuation of compressions caused a prolongation in intubation times for both the I-gel (p < 0.0005) and the ILMA (p < 0.0005).

Conclusion

In this mannequin study, nursing staff can successfully intubate using the I-gel and the ILMA as conduits with comparable success rates, regardless of whether chest compressions are interrupted or not.     

Enteral Access by Double-Balloon Enteroscopy: An Alternative Method of Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Jejunostomy Placement

Background  

Although direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunal feeding tube placement is an increasingly accepted method of providing small-bowel access for long-term enteral nutrition, it is reliant on push enteroscopy and remains a technically challenging procedure with significant failure rates. Double-balloon enteroscopy, with its ability to provide controlled small-bowel intubation may facilitate direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunal tube placement.     

Clinical impact of endoscopy position detecting unit(UPD-3) for a non-sedated colonoscopy

AIM:To evaluate whether an endoscopy position detecting unit(UPD-3) can improve cecal intubation rates, cecal intubation times and visual analog scale(VAS) pain scores, regardless of the colonoscopist's level of experience.METHODS:A total of 260 patients(170 men and 90women)who underwent a colonoscopy were divided into the UPD-3-guided group or the conventional group(no UPD-3 guidance).Colonoscopies were performed by experts(experience of more than 1000colonoscopies)or trainees(experience of less than 100colonoscopies).Cecal intubation rates,cecal intubation times,insertion methods(straight insertion:shortening the colonic fold through the bending technique;roping insertion:right turn shortening technique)and patient discomfort were assessed.Patient discomfort during the endoscope insertion was scored by the VAS that was divided into 6 degrees of pain.RESULTS:The cecum intubation rates,cecal intubation times,number of cecal intubations that were performed in15 min and insertion methods were not significantly different between the conventional group and the UPD-3-guided group.The number of patients who experienced pain during the insertion was markedly less in the UPD-3-guided group than in the conventional group.Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that the following factors were associated with lower VAS pain scores during endoscope insertion:insertion method(straight insertion)and UPD-3guidance in the trainee group.For the experts group,univariate analysis showed that only the insertion method(straight insertion)was associated with lower VAS pain scores.CONCLUSION:Although UPD-3 guidance did not shorten intubation times,it resulted in less patient painduring endoscope insertion compared with conventional endoscopy for the procedures performed by trainees.