The team evaluated patient tolerance and acceptance of unsedated ultra-thin esophagoscopy, and reported their findings in May's Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
Outpatients referred for standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were recruited to undergo unsedated ultrathin esophagoscopy (UUE) with a new 3.1-mm battery-powered esophagoscope.
This was conducted before sedated EGD.
The investigators rated pre-procedure and post-procedure anxiety levels with the Profile of Mood States Tension/Anxiety subscale (POMS-SF T/A).
They also rated symptoms and overall acceptability, and listed procedural preference between EGD and UUE.
Furthermore, patients who refused UUE noted a reason for refusal and also completed the anxiety questionnaire.
A total of 52 of 98 patients recruited agreed to participate, and underwent both UUE and EGD.
Patients who refused UUE were significantly more anxious (mean anxiety score, 8.2 vs 4.5).
| Only 46% of patients would prefer UUE to EGD in the future.
| Gastrointestinal Endoscopy |
Participants reported no significant difference between pre-procedural (4.6 vs 5.3) or post-procedural (3.5 vs 2.6) anxiety for UUE versus standard EGD.
After undergoing both procedures, only 46% stated they would prefer UUE to EGD in the future.
It was found that patients who chose the peroral approach were more likely to prefer UUE than those who chose the transnasal approach (58% vs 23%).
Ashley L. Faulx, of the Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, said on behalf of fellow authors, "Patient acceptance of unsedated endoscopy, even with an ultra-thin instrument, is limited.
"Anxiety assessment by the POMS-SF T/A can identify patients willing to undergo UUE."
"Patients who choose transoral UUE may be more willing to repeat the procedure," it was concluded.