Title: A single-center prospective study on pain alleviation during peroral upper endoscopy with
an ultrathin endoscope
Version: 0 Date: 09 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
We appreciate the opportunity for peer review. The authors demonstrated that oral insertion of an
ultrathin endoscope reduces the patient's pain and increases satisfaction during the examination
compared to an conventional endoscope. This is a very useful point of view in clinical practice.
However, in order to accept the paper, we would like to make the following comments.
1. As the author describes in the limitations section, it is important to consider how patients who
experience pain during conventional endoscopy will subsequently accept endoscopy. Since these
patients were excluded from the study, it seems difficult to conclude that ultrathin endoscopy
really reduces pain.
2. In the patient satisfaction assessment, 20 were not satisfied. What were the reasons?
3. The distribution of pain scores shows that some patients have a score of 7, even with the
ultrathin endoscope. For example, if you focus on patients who had a relatively worse pain score
of 5 or higher in the previous examination, we would like to know how much the score changed
(improved) in the current examination. If you can provide this information, we will have a better
understanding of the advantages of the ultrathin endoscope.
4. The author described the physician side as 77.6% satisfied, but was there a definition of
satisfaction stated?
Title: A single-center prospective study on pain alleviation during peroral upper endoscopy with
an ultrathin endoscope
Version: 0 Date: 09 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
We appreciate the opportunity for peer review. The authors demonstrated that oral insertion of an
ultrathin endoscope reduces the patient's pain and increases satisfaction during the examination
compared to an conventional endoscope. This is a very useful point of view in clinical practice.
However, in order to accept the paper, we would like to make the following comments.
1. As the author describes in the limitations section, it is important to consider how patients who
experience pain during conventional endoscopy will subsequently accept endoscopy. Since these
patients were excluded from the study, it seems difficult to conclude that ultrathin endoscopy
really reduces pain.
2. In the patient satisfaction assessment, 20 were not satisfied. What were the reasons?
3. The distribution of pain scores shows that some patients have a score of 7, even with the
ultrathin endoscope. For example, if you focus on patients who had a relatively worse pain score
of 5 or higher in the previous examination, we would like to know how much the score changed
(improved) in the current examination. If you can provide this information, we will have a better
understanding of the advantages of the ultrathin endoscope.
4. The author described the physician side as 77.6% satisfied, but was there a definition of
satisfaction stated?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A single-center prospective study on pain alleviation during peroral upper endoscopy with
an ultrathin endoscope
Version: 0 Date: 09 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
We appreciate the opportunity for peer review. The authors demonstrated that oral insertion of an
ultrathin endoscope reduces the patient's pain and increases satisfaction during the examination
compared to an conventional endoscope. This is a very useful point of view in clinical practice.
However, in order to accept the paper, we would like to make the following comments.
1. As the author describes in the limitations section, it is important to consider how patients who
experience pain during conventional endoscopy will subsequently accept endoscopy. Since these
patients were excluded from the study, it seems difficult to conclude that ultrathin endoscopy
really reduces pain.
2. In the patient satisfaction assessment, 20 were not satisfied. What were the reasons?
3. The distribution of pain scores shows that some patients have a score of 7, even with the
ultrathin endoscope. For example, if you focus on patients who had a relatively worse pain score
of 5 or higher in the previous examination, we would like to know how much the score changed
(improved) in the current examination. If you can provide this information, we will have a better
understanding of the advantages of the ultrathin endoscope.
4. The author described the physician side as 77.6% satisfied, but was there a definition of
satisfaction stated?
assistant