A single-center prospective study on pain alleviation during peroral upper endoscopy with an ultrathin endoscope

BMC Gastroenterology

Table 2 Procedure characteristics

	Peroral endoscopy with an UT-EGD n = 145	Previous non-sedated C-EGD n = 145	*P-value
EGD time (min)	5 (2–8)	4 (1–14)	< 0.01
Patient satisfaction	125 (86.2%)
Pain score	3 (0–7)	5 (0–10)	< 0.01
Physician satisfaction	111 (76.6%)
Willing to repeat peroral endoscopy with an UT-EGD	139 (95.9%)		0.74

Data are presented as median (range) or number (percentage)
Abbreviations: UT-EGD, ultrathin esophagogastroduodenoscopy; C-EGD, conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy;
*P-value calculated using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical data
or a t-test or the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous data
When expert endoscopists performed the procedure, the median pain score was 2 points (range: 0–6 points), which was significantly lower than the median pain score when the procedure was performed by non-expert endoscopists (median: 3 points; range: 0–7 points; p = 0.04) (Table 3). The patient satisfaction rate was higher when expert endoscopists performed the procedure (88%, 22/25) than when non-expert endoscopists performed the procedure (85.8%, 103/120), though the difference was not significant (p = 0.53). Most patients who underwent endoscopy by an expert (96%; 24/25) or a non-expert (95.8%; 115/120) were willing to undergo repeat endoscopy using the same scope (p = 0.69)

ISSN: 1471-230X