Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.2147/PPA.S88644 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.2147/PPA.S88644 C4576897!4576897 !26396504     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=26396504 &cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215       Patient+Prefer+Adherence 2015 ; 9 (?): 1325-31 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=26396504 |t=2015. Two low-dose bowel-cleansing regimens: efficacy and safety of senna and sodium phosphorus solution for colonoscopy |pdf=|usr=}}{{26396504 }} gab.com Text Two low-dose bowel-cleansing regimens: efficacy and safety of senna and sodium phosphorus solution for colonoscopy JO: Patient Prefer Adherence http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26396504 #FOAvip BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy, adequacy, side effects, and patient compliance of sodium phosphorus (NaP) and senna solutions when preparing the colon before colonoscopy. METHODS: A total of 137 consecutive patients who were considered for colonoscopy evaluation had randomly received one of two premeditated regimens: 90 mL of oral NaP (NaP group) or 500 mL of 1,000 mg of sennosides A and B calcium +66.6 g of sorbitol (senna group). Patients' compliance with the bowel-cleansing method was determined using a questionnaire prior to the colonoscopic examination. On the other hand, the adequacy of the bowel-cleansing method was evaluated by the colonoscopist who was blind to the bowel-cleansing regimen used prior to the examination of the colon from the rectum to the cecum. RESULTS: Nausea and vomiting complaints were seen more frequently in the NaP group than in the senna group (47 vs 28 and 31 vs 10; P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively). The response to the question of whether the patients would like to use the same regimen again or not was similar in both groups. The acceptable bowel-cleansing rate was also comparable across both groups. Nevertheless, the number of patients that experienced excellent bowel cleansing in terms of general appraisal of the colonoscopic evaluation was significantly greater in the NaP group than in the senna group (46 vs 25; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Although bowel cleansing was better in the NaP group, both cleansing regimens were comparable regarding the admissibility of the preparations for the procedure. The senna regimen is, however, superior to the NaP regimen in terms of application compliance and its side effects, and it may be an effective alternative for cleansing the bowel prior to colonoscopic examination. Twit Text FOAVip Two low-dose bowel-cleansing regimens: efficacy and safety of senna and sodium phosphorus solution for colonoscopy ????Patient Prefer Adherence http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26396504 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26396504 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|26396504 }}</ref> Two low-dose bowel-cleansing regimens: efficacy and safety of senna and sodium phosphorus solution for colonoscopy #MMPMID26396504 Poyrazoglu OK ; Yalniz M Patient Prefer Adherence 2015[]; 9 (?): 1325-31 PMID26396504 show ga BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy, adequacy, side effects, and patient compliance of sodium phosphorus (NaP) and senna solutions when preparing the colon before colonoscopy. METHODS: A total of 137 consecutive patients who were considered for colonoscopy evaluation had randomly received one of two premeditated regimens: 90 mL of oral NaP (NaP group) or 500 mL of 1,000 mg of sennosides A and B calcium +66.6 g of sorbitol (senna group). Patients' compliance with the bowel-cleansing method was determined using a questionnaire prior to the colonoscopic examination. On the other hand, the adequacy of the bowel-cleansing method was evaluated by the colonoscopist who was blind to the bowel-cleansing regimen used prior to the examination of the colon from the rectum to the cecum. RESULTS: Nausea and vomiting complaints were seen more frequently in the NaP group than in the senna group (47 vs 28 and 31 vs 10; P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively). The response to the question of whether the patients would like to use the same regimen again or not was similar in both groups. The acceptable bowel-cleansing rate was also comparable across both groups. Nevertheless, the number of patients that experienced excellent bowel cleansing in terms of general appraisal of the colonoscopic evaluation was significantly greater in the NaP group than in the senna group (46 vs 25; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Although bowel cleansing was better in the NaP group, both cleansing regimens were comparable regarding the admissibility of the preparations for the procedure. The senna regimen is, however, superior to the NaP regimen in terms of application compliance and its side effects, and it may be an effective alternative for cleansing the bowel prior to colonoscopic examination. ?Two low-dose bowel-cleansing regimens: efficacy and safety of senna an(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing