Skip to main content

Table 1 Per-protocol and intention-to-treat cecal intubation rates by intervention

From: Effect of a proprietary intraluminal stiffening wire device on cecal intubation time and rate with used colonoscopes; a randomized, controlled trial

 

Intervention

 

Unaided colonoscope (A)

Standard wire (B)

Firm wire (C)

Number

37

38

37

Per-protocol Cecal intubation rate

(30) 81.1% (CI, 67.8 – 94.3%)

(27) 71.1% (CI, 55.9 – 86.2%)

*(26/35) 74.3% (CI, 59.1 – 90%)

Intention-to-treat Cecal intubation rate

(36) 97.3% (CI, 91.8 – 100%)

(35) 92.1% (CI, 83.1 – 100%)

(31) 83.8% (CI, 71.3 – 96.2%)

  1. *Two cases in this group are excluded from the per-protocol analysis as failure occurred before the assigned intervention could be introduced.
  2. Chi-squared test of difference between per-protocol A and B cecal intubation rate, P = 0.31.
  3. Chi-squared test of difference between per-protocol A and C cecal intubation rate, P = 0.49.
  4. Exact McNemar’s test of difference between intention-to-treat and per-protocol cecal intubation rate under intervention A, P = 0.0313.
Back to article page

BMC Research Notes

ISSN: 1756-0500

Contact us