Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Steine, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Steine, S.

Radiology, Vol 191, 99-101, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Which hurts the most? A comparison of pain rating during double- contrast barium enema examination and colonoscopy

S Steine
Department of General Practice, Universitetet I Oslo, Norway.

PURPOSE: To study the degree of pain caused by double-contrast barium enema examination and colonoscopy and to compare pain ratings by patients and medical personnel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a random sample, 190 patients (aged 45-79 years) (mean, 63.1 years) recorded their experiences of pain during each procedure and the medical staff recorded their impressions of the patients' pain, on a 10-point progressive scale. The data were analyzed with the Wilcoxon rank test, Spearman rank correlation, and generalized kappa value. RESULTS: Patients' pain ratings were significantly higher during colonoscopy than during double-contrast barium enema examination (P < .0001). Pain was rated significantly higher by patients than by personnel for both procedures (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: In the choice of procedure, patients' high level of pain during colonoscopy should be remembered. The medical staff frequently underestimated patients' pain during both procedures, and this study documents a need for more extensive pain relief measures during potentially painful examinations of the large bowel.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
R. W. F. Geenen, S. M. Hussain, F. Cademartiri, J.-W. Poley, P. D. Siersema, and G. P. Krestin
CT and MR Colonography: Scanning Techniques, Postprocessing, and Emphasis on Polyp Detection
RadioGraphics, October 3, 2003; (2003) 18.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. A. Taylor, S. Halligan, B. P. Saunders, P. Bassett, M. Vance, and C. I. Bartram
Acceptance by Patients of Multidetector CT Colonography Compared with Barium Enema Examinations, Flexible Sigmoidoscopy, and Colonoscopy
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2003; 181(4): 913 - 921.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
P. M. McMahon, J. L. Bosch, S. Gleason, E. F. Halpern, J. S. Lester, and G. S. Gazelle
Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening
Radiology, April 1, 2001; 219(1): 44 - 50.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
W. Luboldt, P. Bauerfeind, S. Wildermuth, B. Marincek, M. Fried, and J. F. Debatin
Colonic Masses: Detection with MR Colonography
Radiology, August 1, 2000; 216(2): 383 - 388.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Glick
Double-Contrast Barium Enema for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Review of the Issues and a Comparison with Other Screening Alternatives
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2000; 174(6): 1529 - 1537.
[Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.