Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Scholarly Works (2 results)

  • Article
  • Peer Reviewed
UC Irvine Previously Published Works (1991)
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and patient tolerance of a new pulsed irrigation system to colonic lavage for colonoscopic preparation. Thirty-four prospective patients scheduled for routine colonoscopy were randomized to one of two preparations: a per-rectal pulsed irrigation device (18 patients) versus per-oral colonic lavage (15 patients). Colonoscopic preparation was assessed on a 0 to 4 plus scale by region and overall. This was done live and by video tape by two independent endoscopists who were blinded to the patient's preparation. There was no significant difference with respect to cleanliness of the colon with pulsed irrigation patients having an average overall preparation score of 3.00 +/- 0.19 (SEM) versus colonic lavage patients with a score of 3.14 +/- 0.19. There was also no statistically significant difference between the two groups with respect to demographics, time to reach the cecum, time for entire procedure, volume of aspiration or wash, or sedation given. We conclude that the new pulsed irrigation device provides an alternative to the standard per-oral lavage solution for colonoscopic preparation.
    Cover page: Per-rectal pulsed irrigation versus per-oral colonic lavage for colonoscopy preparation: a randomized, controlled trialCreative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
    • Article
    • Peer Reviewed
    UC Irvine Previously Published Works (2004)

    Motor behavior and sensorimotor activation of the cerebrum and cerebellum were measured before and after motor imagery-based mental practice (MP) and physical practice (PP) of a sequential motor task. Two-button-press sequences (A, B) were performed outside a magnetic resonance imaging scanner and at 2 Hz inside the scanner during a pretest. Participants (n = 39) completed PP, MP, or no practice (NP) of Sequence A for 1 week and were posttested. Sequence A performance improved 121%, 86%, and 4% for the PP, MP, and NP groups, respectively (p < 0.05), while Sequence B improved 56%, 40%, and 38% (p > 0.05). PP improvements were accompanied by increased striatal and decreased cerebellar activation, while MP improvements were accompanied by increased cerebellar, premotor, and striatal activation. The efficacy of MP for activating cerebral and cerebellar sensorimotor networks suggests that MP might be an effective substitute or complement to PP to activate compensatory networks for motor rehabilitation.

      Cover page: Cerebral and cerebellar sensorimotor plasticity following motor imagery-based mental practice of a sequential movement.
      Top