The aim of this study is to compare nasal and oral insertion and to determine which of them is more comfortable and less time consuming for the patient.
ID
Source
Brief title
Condition
- Respiratory tract therapeutic procedures
Synonym
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Time needed until vocal cords have been passed.
Secondary outcome
Time needed until conversion, quality of life, VAS-painscore, total time of the
scopy, Borgscore for dyspnea and possible complications like nosebleeds.
Background summary
In order to perform a bronchoscopy, the bronchoscope can be inserted through
the nose or mouth. Usually insertion through the nose is preferred, although
both methods are commonly used in practise. A Korean study states that oral
insertion is more comfortable for patients than nasal insertion, also less
dyspnea was reported when oral insertion was used. The insertion route had no
significant effect on the outcome. If this is also the case for other
etnicities is not sure.
Nasal insertion is known to have a higher rate of nose bleeds and might be a
more difficult insertion pathway. It is possible for the patient to experience
more pain or discomfort when nasal insertion is used. On the other hand, an
inserted mouthpiece will not be used while experienced dyspnea is lower, which
might result in a more comfortable experience. If nasal insertion seems
impossible, conversion to the oral route is justified after both nostrills have
been tried for insertion. Oral insertion is accompanied with an extensive
feeling of dyspnea and a feeling of retching. Also there is the fear of scope
biting by patients, to prevent this from happening an mouthpiece is used.
Chances for insertion bleeding and impossible insertion are much lower.
Hypothesis: Oral insertion for bronchoscopy is a faster and more comfortable
route for the patient than nasal insertion.
Study objective
The aim of this study is to compare nasal and oral insertion and to determine
which of them is more comfortable and less time consuming for the patient.
Study design
This study is a randomized controlled intervention study.
Intervention
Nasal or oral inserted bronchoscopy.
Study burden and risks
The patient will be asked to fill out a questionaire before and after
bronchoscopy. During bronchoscopy there is no action required of the patient,
the researcher observes the bronchoscopy. During bronchoscopy there is no other
risk for the patient than risks for bronchoscopy.
Kleiweg 500
Rotterdam 3045 PM
NL
Kleiweg 500
Rotterdam 3045 PM
NL
Listed location countries
Age
Inclusion criteria
Indication for bronchoscopy;
Age > 18;
Compos mentis;
Control of Dutch language.
Exclusion criteria
Hemorrhagic diathesis;
Active use of bood thinners / anticoagulants (if ascal is stopped 7 days before bronchoscopy OR INR is +/- 1.5 with Vit. K antagonists inclusion is possible);
Recent ENT-surgery's (<4 weeks);
Recent asthma / COPD exacerbation/ respiratory tract infection (< 2 weeks);
Allergic rhinitis (unless treated or not within the season);
Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (unless PPI control);
Non coorperative / sedated patient.
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| CCMO | NL48853.101.14 |