↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional deficiency during colonoscopy preparation: the forgotten iatrogeny.

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nutritional deficiency during colonoscopy preparation: the forgotten iatrogeny.
Published in
Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, January 2018
DOI 10.17235/reed.2018.5140/2017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gonçalo Nunes, Ana Teresa Barata, Carla Adriana Santos, Marta Patita, Jorge Fonseca

Abstract

Bowel preparation for colonoscopy induces a semi-fasting state, with a potential negative impact on fragile patients. The present study aims to quantify nutritional deficiency during colonoscopy preparation. This was an observational and cross-sectional study. A convenience sample was obtained that included adults that underwent colonoscopy after bowel preparation with Klean-Prep® according to the center protocol. Anthropometric evaluation was performed and nutritional deficiency was calculated via the quantification of energy and protein intake during the 48 hours prior to the examination which was compared with the individuals' needs. The association between nutritional deficiency with the quality of bowel preparation, age and status (hospitalized/ambulatory) was evaluated. The study included 131 patients aged 21-91 years (mean 63.6 ± 13.2 years); 73 cases were male. Malnutrition reached 67.2% using specific anthropometric tools. A median preparation quality of six points was found when the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale was considered. The mean intake 48 hours prior to the procedure was 1,795 kcal and 100 g of protein. A daily energy intake of less than 50% of the individual needs was observed in 88 patients and less than 25% in 29 cases. The mean energy and protein deficiency were 59% (p < 0.01) and 45% (p < 0.01), and there was no correlation with preparation quality (p > 0.05), which was similar in hospitalized and ambulatory patients (p > 0.05). Nutritional deficiency was higher in older patients (p = 0.04). Nutritional deficiency during colonoscopy preparation was significant, more so in older patients, and there was no correlation with the quality of bowel preparation. We conclude that bowel preparation regimens should be reformulated with an improved nutritional intake and the inclusion of nutritional supplements without residues.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 12 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 14 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2018.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas
#637
of 891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#389,382
of 449,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas
#37
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 891 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 449,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.