Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 7501721

Psychological considerations in colonoscopy.

Abstract

In summary, psychological issues around the colonoscopy procedure have not yet been fully studied or even formulated. The framework taken here is to consider psychological preconditions to disease, psychological barriers to screening, and ways to maximize the psychological strength of patients when presenting serious diagnoses. Two common themes are present in this review. First, the idea of hopelessness and loss of personal control is present throughout the research in terms of personality predispositions, decisions to seek care, and outcome of disease when present. Physicians need to address the question, what can I do to maximize the hopefulness of this person before, during, and after screening? Are we encouraging an optimistic perspective in the lives of others? The second theme is closely related and that is the critical nature of the patient/physician relationship in all stages of health/illness behavior. It is often the positive, empathic strength of this relationship that affects patient behavior and ultimately the patient's medical outcome. Future research as well as physician self-examination and increased knowledge in this area are truly important. It is in this way that the procedure of colonoscopy truly becomes part of the total patient care.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P J Wagner, J B Kenrick, T Rojas, L D Woodward. 1995. Psychological considerations in colonoscopy.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7501721/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparative Efficacy of Different AI Systems for Polyp Detection by Size During Colonoscopy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer remains a leading cause of death despite being largely preventable through polypectomy. AI systems designed to enhance polyp detection during colonoscopy have shown promise, but the extent to which they improve detection of different-sized polyps remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the size-stratified efficacy of AI-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) method, and generated exploratory rankings while acknowledging all cross-platform comparisons are indirect. METHODS: This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science from inception to July 25, 2026, supplemented by citation searching. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AI-assisted vs standard colonoscopy in adults (≥18 years of age), reporting mean polyp detection counts stratified by size (≤5 mm, 6-9 mm, and ≥10 mm). Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. We conducted frequentist NMA using the HKSJ method with restricted maximum likelihood estimation, calculated 95% prediction intervals (PIs), and assessed heterogeneity using I2 and τ2. Certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework. RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs (4156 participants) compared 8 AI systems to standard colonoscopy, forming a network without direct AI comparisons. For diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), AI showed a modest advantage (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.35, 95% PI -1.12 to 1.54), but substantial heterogeneity (I2=86.6%) and wide PI crossing the null indicated high uncertainty. EndoScreener showed the most consistent evidence (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.18-0.54). For small and large polyps, effects were minimal (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.06, 95% PI -0.03 to 0.07; SMD 0.01, 95% CI 0.00-0.02, 95% PI -0.01 to 0.03). GRADE certainty was very low for diminutive polyps and low for small and large polyps. Sensitivity analysis excluding Tianjin YuJin did not materially change findings. CONCLUSIONS: AI may modestly enhance diminutive polyp detection, but effects on small and large polyps are minimal, with no platform superiority. Given very low to low certainty, findings are hypothesis-generating. This exploratory NMA provides size-stratified comparisons that can inform future head-to-head trial design. Unlike prior reviews aggregating all polyp sizes, we show the overall AI benefit is driven by diminutive polyp detection, providing a framework for targeted deployment-prioritizing AI for diminutive polyp screening, with limited value for larger lesions. Head-to-head trials are urgently needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD420251266932; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251266932.

Colonoscopy↗

Optical adjuncts for enhanced colonoscopic diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Optical techniques using previously unexploited properties of light interaction with tissue may be valuable in the detection, diagnosis and staging of colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: A Medline search (1990 to present) was conducted on optical diagnostics in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The reference list of each identified article was reviewed for further relevant papers. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Chromoendoscopy is the only optical adjunct to colonoscopy that has been tested in large randomized clinical trials. It improves the detection of small and flat colorectal adenomas, and of neoplasia in chronic ulcerative colitis and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. All other techniques are the subject of ongoing research and the practicality of population screening with any of the methods has yet to be established. Optical techniques may, however, permit immediate clinical diagnosis, removing the need for histological analysis. They may also improve the diagnosis of early colonic neoplasia.

Colonoscopy↗

Fragile egos.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Colonoscopy↗