Sweetened carbonated drinks do not alter upper digestive tract physiology in healthy subjects

Sweetened carbonated beverages are widely consumed, which has fuelled several conflicting opinions about their effects on upper digestive tract functions. We aimed to evaluate the effect of sweetened carbonated drinks, consumed with a standard meal, on gastro-oesophageal reflux, gastric emptying and gallbladder contraction and postmeal sensations in healthy subjects. Thirteen healthy volunteers (seven women, six males; median age 22 years) were tested following the intake of 300 mL sweetened water containing increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (seven subjects), and of 300 mL sweetened commercial flavoured drink with and without carbon dioxide (six subjects). Gastro-oesophageal reflux, gastric emptying and gallbladder contraction were studied by pH-impedance, octanoic acid breath test and ultrasound respectively. Gastro-oesophageal refluxes were significantly increased 1 h after meal with both water and commercial beverages; only sweetened water without carbon dioxide determined a persistently increasing number of refluxes 2 h postmeal. No differences were found for gastric emptying, gallbladder contraction or postmeal symptoms with any of the beverages tested. This study shows that 300 mL of sweetened carbonated beverage with different levels of carbonation or a commercial soft drink do not modify the physiology of the upper digestive tract

The Global Rating Scale in clinical practice: A comprehensive quality assurance programme for endoscopy departments

Background: The Global Rating Scale is an endoscopy quality assurance programme, successfully implemented in England. It remains uncertain whether it is applicable in another health care setting. Aim: To assess the applicability of the Global Rating Scale as benchmark tool in an international context. Methods: Eleven Dutch endoscopy departments were included for a Global Rating Scale-census, performed as a cross-sectional evaluation, July 2010. Two Global Rating Scale-dimensions - 'clinical quality' and 'patient experience' - were assessed across six items using a range of levels: from level-D (basic) to level-A (excellent). Construct validity was assessed by comparing department-specific colonoscopy audit data to GRS-levels. Results: For 'clinical quality', variable scores were achieved in items 'safety' (9% = B, 27% = C, 64% = D) and 'communication' (46% = A, 18% = C, 36% = D). All departments achieved a basic score in 'quality' (100% = D). For 'patient experience', variable scores were achieved in 'timeliness' (18%=A, 9%=B, 73%=D) and 'booking-choice' (36%=B, 46%=C, 18%=D). All departments achieved basic scores in 'equality' (100%=D). Departments obtaining level-C or above in 'information', 'comfort', 'communication', 'timeliness' and 'aftercare', achieved significantly better audit outcomes compared to those obtaining level-D (p<0.05). Conclusion: The Global Rating Scale is appropriate to use outside England. There was significant variance. across departments in dimensions. Most Global Rating Scale-levels were in line with departments' audit outcomes, indicating construct validity. (C) 2012 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved