AIM:To compare efficacy,patient compliance,acceptability,satisfaction,safety,and adenoma detection rate of sodium phosphate tablets(NaP,CLICOLONTM)to a standard 4 L polyethylene glycol(PEG)solution for bowel cleansing for adults undergoing colonoscopy.METHODS:In this multicenter,randomized,prospective,investigator-blind study,the relatively young(19-60years)healthy outpatients without comorbidity were randomly assigned to one of two arms.All colonoscopy were scheduled in the morning.The NaP group was asked to take 4 tablets,5 times the evening before and4 tablets,3 times early on the morning of the colonoscopy.The PEG group was asked to ingest 2 L of solution the evening before and 2 L early in the morning of the procedure.Adequacy of bowel preparation was scored using the Boston bowel preparation scale.RESULTS:No significant differences were observed between the NaP group(n=158)and PEG group(n=162)in bowel cleansing quality(adequate preparation93.0%vs 92.6%,P=0.877),patient compliance(P=0.228),overall adverse events(63.3%vs 69.1%,P=0.269),or adenoma detection rate(34.8%vs 35.2%,P=0.944).Patient acceptability,satisfaction,and patient rating of taste were higher in the NaP group than in the PEG group(P<0.001).CONCLUSION:NaP tablets,compared with PEG solution,produced equivalent colon cleansing,did not cause more side effects,and had better patient acceptability and satisfaction in the relatively young(age<60years)healthy individuals without comorbidity.An oral tablet formulation could make bowel preparation less burdensome,resulting in greater patient participation in screening programs. AIM: To compare efficacy, patient compliance, acceptability, satisfaction, safety, and adenoma detection rate of sodium phosphate tablets (NaP, CLICOLONTM) to a standard 4 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution for bowel cleansing for adults undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, prospective, investigator-blind study, the more young (19-60 years) healthy outpatients without comorbidity were randomly assigned to one of two arms. All colonoscopy were scheduled in the morning. The NaP group was asked to take 4 tablets , 5 times the evening before and 4 tablets, 3 times early on the morning of the colonoscopy. PEG Group was asked to ingest 2 L of solution the evening before and 2 L early in the morning of the procedure. Adequacy of bowel preparation was scored using the Boston bowel preparation scale .RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between the NaP group (n = 158) and PEG group (n = 162) in bowel cleansing quality (93.0% vs 92.6%, P = 0.877) patient compliance (P = 0.228), overall adverse events (63.3% vs 69.1%, P = 0.269), or adenoma detection rate (34.8% vs 35.2%, P = 0.944) the NaP tablets than in the PEG group (P <0.001) .CONCLUSION: NaP tablets, compared with PEG solution, produced equivalent colon cleansing, did not cause more side effects, and had better patient acceptability and satisfaction in the relatively younger (age < 60years) healthy individuals without comorbidity. An oral tablet formulation could make bowel preparation less burdensome, resulting in greater patient participation in screening programs.