The following table or figure may be downloaded to PowerPoint for personal use in teaching and presentations. This feature is available to all subscribers to the journal.

You MUST read and follow the guidelines at Request to Reproduce AJR Content if you are distributing or using AJR content beyond academic use (limited distribution, non-revenue producing, or educational purposes).

(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds.
If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Click on image to view larger version.

Fig. 3A —Graphs show subjective image quality scores on per-segment basis. Displays on y-axis proportion of segments and on x-axis preparation groups. Fecal tagging (A) and amount of feces (B) were scored on supine images (for group 1, 66 segments; group 2, 58 segments; group 3, 60 segments; and group 4, 54 segments). Distention (C) and diagnostic readability (D) were scored on supine and prone images (132, 120, 210, and 108 segments, respectively). Group 2 performed significantly poorer with regard to amount of residual feces in comparison with group 4 (p = 0.04).