Practice audit is an important component of continuing professional development that may more readily be undertaken if it were less complex. This qualitative study assessed the use of personal digital assistants to facilitate data collection and review.
Personal digital assistants programmed with standard questionnaires related to upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (Practice Audit in Gastroenterology-Endoscopy [‘PAGE-Endo’]) and colonoscopies (PAGE-Colonoscopy [‘PAGE-Colo’]) were provided to Canadian gastroenterologists, surgeons and internists. Over a three-week audit period, participants recorded indications, and the expected (E) and reported (R) findings for each procedure. Thereafter, participants recorded compliance with reporting, the ease of use and value of the PAGE program, and their willingness to perform another audit.
Over 15 to 18 months, 173 participants completed PAGE-Endo (6168 procedures) and 111 completed PAGE-Colo (4776 procedures). Most respondents noted that PAGE was easy to use (99%), beneficial (88% to 95%), and that they were willing undertake another audit (92% to 95%). In PAGE-Endo, alarm features were prevalent (55%), but major reported findings were less common than expected: esophagitis (E 29.9%, R 14.8%), esophageal stricture (E 8.3%, R 3.6%), gastric ulcer (E 17.0%, R 4.7%), gastric cancer (E 4.3%, R 1.0%) and duodenal ulcer (E 11.5%, R 5.7%). In PAGE-Colo, more colonoscopies were performed for symptom investigation (55%) than for screening (25%) or surveillance (20%). There were marked interprovincial variations with respect to sedation, biopsies and technical aspects of colonoscopy.
Secure, real-time data entry with review of aggregate and individual data in the PAGE program provided an acceptable, straightforward methodology for accredited practice audit activities. PAGE has considerable potential for continuing professional development in gastroenterology and other specialties.
Colonoscopy; Continuing medical education; Continuing professional development; Endoscopy; Gastroenterology; Maintenance of certification; Personal digital assistant; Practice audit
Usually, colonoscopy insertion is performed by the colonoscopist (one-person technique). Quite common in the early days of endoscopy, the assisting nurse is now only rarely doing the insertion (two-person technique). Using the Norwegian national endoscopy quality assurance (QA) programme, Gastronet, we wanted to explore the extent of two-person technique practice and look into possible differences in performance and QA output measures.
100 colonoscopists in 18 colonoscopy centres having reported their colonoscopies to Gastronet between January and December 2009 were asked if they practiced one- or two-person technique during insertion of the colonoscope. They were categorized accordingly for comparative analyses of QA indicators.
75 endoscopists responded to the survey (representing 9368 colonoscopies) - 62 of them (83%) applied one-person technique and 13 (17%) two-person technique. Patients age and sex distributions and indications for colonoscopy were also similar in the two groups. Caecal intubation was 96% in the two-person group compared to 92% in the one-person group (p < 0.001). Pain reports were similar in the groups, but time to the caecum was shorter and the use of sedation less in the two-person group.
Two-person technique for colonoscope insertion was practiced by a considerable minority of endoscopists (17%). QA indicators were either similar to or better than one-person technique. This suggests that there may be some beneficial elements to this technique worth exploring and try to import into the much preferred one-person insertion technique.
The water method has promising features for colonoscopy but the learning curve to master the technique is unknown.
To describe the learning phase, and pitfalls of the water method and its impact on procedural outcomes by an experienced colonoscopist.
Review of prospectively collected data in a performance improvement project
endoscopy Unit at a VA medical center
200 consecutive veterans undergoing colonoscopy
An experienced colonoscopist examined 4 consecutive groups of 25 patients each using the water method to define the learning curve. Outcomes were compared to a historical cohort (n=100) examined by the same colonoscopist using usual air insufflation.
Main outcome measures
Intent-to-treat (ITT) cecal intubation rate.
ITT cecal intubation rate increased from 76% (first) to 96% (fourth quartile). Cecal intubation time in the first 2 quartiles was significantly longer (8.9±1.0 and 8.2±0.8 min, respectively) than that in the historical cohort (5.8±0.4 min) but decreased and became comparable to control values in the next 2 quartiles (7.2±0.9 and 6.6±0.6 min, respectively). Overall adenoma detection rate as a group (55%), compared favorably to the historical cohort (46%).
The water method is relatively easy to learn for an experienced colonoscopist. Mastery of the method resulted in cecal intubation rate and overall adenoma detection rate meeting quality performance standards.
water method; learning curve; adenoma detection rate; colonoscopy
To examine the outcomes of endoscopic procedures performed by a family physician trained in endoscopy.
Quality assurance practice audit involving medical chart review.
Rural family practice in Peace River, Alta.
All patients who had endoscopic procedures performed by a rural family physician during the period September 24, 1999, to May 31, 2007.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Type of endoscopic procedure performed, indications for and results of the endoscopies, complication rates, referral to tertiary care physicians, and patient demographic information. Colonoscopy competency was determined by the reach-the-cecum rate and by time for colonoscopy completion.
A total of 1956 endoscopic examinations were performed; complete data were verified for 1949 procedures, including 667 gastroscopies, 1178 colonoscopies, and 104 sigmoidoscopies. Endoscopic findings with gastroscopy included 50 (7.5%) cases of peptic ulcer disease, 17 (2.5%) cases of celiac disease, and 6 (0.9%) cases of upper gastrointestinal cancer; 27 (2.1%) cases of colorectal cancer and 48 (3.7%) new cases of inflammatory bowel disease were discovered with lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. The overall adenoma detection rate was 23.7% for male patients and 15.4% for female patients; for patients 50 years and older, it was 29.8% and 18.0% for male and female patients, respectively. The adjusted reach-the-cecum rate for colonoscopies was 92.3%. There was 1 colonic perforation and 1 postpolypectomy bleed. A total of 123 (6.3%) patients required referral to tertiary care physicians, half for definitive surgical intervention.
A trained family physician can perform endoscopy competently with findings and complication rates consistent with current quality assurance guidelines for endoscopy.
In order to improve colonoscopy quality, reports must include key quality indicators which can be monitored.
To determine the quality of colonoscopy reports in diverse practice settings.
The consortium of the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI), which includes 73 gastroenterology practice sites in the United States which use a structured computerized endoscopy report generator, which includes fields for specific quality indicators.
Prospective data collection from 2004 to 2006.
Main Outcomes Measurements
Reports were queried to determine if specific quality indicators were recorded. Specific endpoints, including quality of bowel prep, cecal intubation rate and detection of polyp(s) >9mm in screening exams were compared in 53 practices with more than 100 colonoscopy procedures per year.
Of the 438,521 reports received during the study period, 13.9% did not include bowel prep quality and 10.1% did not include co-morbidity classification. The overall cecal intubation rate was 96.3%, but cecal landmarks were not recorded in 14% of reports. Missing polyp descriptors included polyp size (4.9%) and morphology (14.7%). Report of interventions for adverse events during the procedure varied from 0 to 6.5%. Among average-risk patients receiving screening exams, the detection rate of polyps >9mm, adjusted for age, gender and race, was between 4 and 10% in 81% of practices.
Bias toward high rates of reporting because of standard use of a computerized report generator.
There is significant variation in quality of colonoscopy reports across diverse practices, despite the use of a computerized report generator. Measurement of quality indicators in clinical practice can identify areas for quality improvement.
Achieving the target of 95% colonoscopy completion rate at centres conducting colorectal screening programs is an important issue. Large centres and teaching hospitals employing endoscopists with different levels of training and expertise risk achieving worse results. Deep sedation with propofol in routine colonoscopy could maximize the results of cecal intubation.
The present study on the experience of a single centre focused on estimating the overall completion rate of colonoscopies performed under routine propofol sedation at a large teaching hospital with many operators involved, and on assessing the factors that influence the success rate of the procedure and how to improve this performance, analyzing the aspects relating to using of deep sedation. Twenty-one endoscopists, classified by their level of specialization in colonoscopic practice, performed 1381 colonoscopies under deep sedation. All actions needed for the anaesthesiologist to restore adequate oxygenation or hemodynamics, even for transient changes, were recorded.
The "crude" overall completion rate was 93.3%. This finding shows that with routine deep sedation, the colonoscopy completion rate nears, but still does not reach, the target performance for colonoscopic screening programs, at centers where colonoscopists of difference experience are employed in such programs.
Factors interfering with cecal intubation were: inadequate colon cleansing, endoscopists' expertise in colonoscopic practice, patients' body weight under 60 kg or age over 71 years, and the need for active intervention by the anaesthesiologist. The most favourable situation - a patient less than 71 years old with a body weight over 60 kg, an adequate bowel preparation, a "highly experienced specialist" performing the test, and no need for active anaesthesiological intervention during the procedure - coincided with a 98.8% probability of the colonoscopy being completed.
With routine deep sedation, the colonoscopy completion rate nears the target performance for colonoscopic screening programs, at centers where colonoscopists of difference experience are employed in such programs. Organizing the daily workload to prevent negative factors affecting the success rate from occurring in combination may enable up to 85% of incomplete procedures to be converted into successful colonoscopies.
Primary care clinicians initiate and oversee colorectal screening for their patients, but colonoscopy, a central component of screening programs, is usually performed by consultants. The accuracy and safety of colonoscopy varies among endoscopists, even those with mainstream training and certification. Therefore, it is a primary care responsibility to choose the best available colonoscopy services. A working group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable identified a set of indicators that primary care clinicians can use to assess the quality of colonoscopy services. Quality measures are of actual performance, not training, specialty, or experience alone. The main elements of quality are a complete report, technical competence, and a safe setting for the procedure. We provide explicit criteria that primary care physicians can use when choosing a colonoscopist. Information on quality indicators will be increasingly available with quality improvement efforts within the colonoscopy community and growth in the use of electronic medical records.
primary care clinicians; colorectal screening; endoscopist; colonoscopist
The goal of this project was to create and evaluate a quality measures program for colonoscopy procedures using measures recently defined by multi-specialty groups and using resources of the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI), a gastrointestinal endoscopy research consortium. Participants collect procedure data through an endoscopic reporting system developed by CORI. Endoscopists practicing at 35 sites in 21 communities and 16 states were included in the study. Individual quality reports with 15 measures were made available monthly to endoscopists in 2/3 of the communities. Compliance with the quality measures was captured for each endoscopist prior to and at the end of the one-year intervention period. Changes in measure compliance were small and limited by lack of pathology data and documentation as well as modifications to the computing system during the study period. This study points out the difficulties of utilizing quality report cards with data captured during clinical care.
Colonoscopy requires training and experience to ensure accuracy and safety. Currently, no objective, validated process exists to determine when an endoscopist has attained technical competence. Kinematics data describing movements of laparoscopic instruments have been used in surgical skill assessment to define expert surgical technique. We have developed a novel system to record kinematics data during colonoscopy and quantitatively assess colonoscopist performance.
To use kinematic analysis of colonoscopy to quantitatively assess endoscopic technical performance.
Prospective cohort study.
Tertiary-care academic medical center.
This study involved physicians who perform colonoscopy.
Application of a kinematics data collection system to colonoscopy evaluation.
Main Outcome Measurements
Kinematics data, validated task load assessment instrument, and technical difficulty visual analog scale.
All 13 participants completed the colonoscopy to the terminal ileum on the standard colon model. Attending physicians reached the terminal ileum quicker than fellows (median time, 150.19 seconds vs 299.86 seconds; p < .01) with reduced path lengths for all 4 sensors, decreased flex (1.75 m vs 3.14 m; P = .03), smaller tip angulation, reduced absolute roll, and lower curvature of the endoscope. With performance of attending physicians serving as the expert reference standard, the mean kinematic score increased by 19.89 for each decrease in postgraduate year (P < .01). Overall, fellows experienced greater mental, physical, and temporal demand than did attending physicians.
Small cohort size.
Kinematic data and score calculation appear useful in the evaluation of colonoscopy technical skill levels. The kinematic score appears to consistently vary by year of training. Because this assessment is nonsubjective, it may be an improvement over current methods for determination of competence. Ongoing studies are establishing benchmarks and characteristic profiles of skill groups based on kinematics data.
Some patients under close colonoscopic surveillance still develop colorectal cancer, thus suggesting the overlook of colorectal adenoma by endoscopists. AFI detects colorectal adenoma as a clear magenta, therefore the efficacy of AFI is expected to improve the detection ability of colorectal adenoma. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of AFI in detecting colorectal adenoma.
This study enrolled 88 patients who underwent colonoscopy at Asahikawa Medical University and Kushiro Medical Association Hospital. A randomly selected colonoscopist first observed the sigmoid colon and rectum with conventional high resolution endosopy (HRE). Then the colonoscopist changed the mode to AFI and handed to the scope to another colonoscopist who knew no information about the HRE. Then the second colonoscopist observed the sigmoid colon and rectum. Each colonoscopist separately recorded the findings. The detection rate, miss rate and procedural time were assessed in prospective manner.
The detection rate of flat and depressed adenoma, but not elevated adenoma, by AFI is significantly higher than that by HRE. In less-experienced endoscopists, AFI dramatically increased the detection rate (30.3%) and reduced miss rate (0%) of colorectal adenoma in comparison to those of HRE (7.7%, 50.0%), but not for experienced endoscopists. The procedural time of HRE was significantly shorter than that of AFI.
AFI increased the detection rate and reduced the miss rate of flat and depressed adenomas. These advantages of AFI were limited to less-experienced endoscopists because experienced endoscopists exhibited a substantially high detection rate for colorectal adenoma with HRE.
Autofluorescence imaging; Colorectal adenoma; Detection rate; Flat and depressed adenoma; Less-experienced endoscopist; High-resolution colonoscope
AIM: To clarify the effectiveness of CO2 insufflation in potentially difficult colonoscopy cases, particularly in relation to the experience level of colonoscopists.
METHODS: One hundred twenty potentially difficult cases were included in this study, which involved females with a low body mass index and patients with earlier abdominal and/or pelvic open surgery or previously diagnosed left-side colon diverticulosis. Patients receiving colonoscopy examinations without sedation using a pediatric variable-stiffness colonoscope were divided into two groups based on either CO2 or standard air insufflation. Both insufflation procedures were also evaluated according to the experience level of the respective colonoscopists who were divided into an experienced colonoscopist (EC) group and a less experienced colonoscopist (LEC) group. Study measurements included a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for patient pain during and after colonoscopy examinations, in addition to insertion to the cecum and withdrawal times.
RESULTS: Examination times did not differ, however, VAS scores in the CO2 group were significantly better than in the air group (P < 0.001, two-way ANOVA) from immediately after the procedure and up to 2 h later. There were no significant differences between either insufflation method in the EC group (P = 0.29), however, VAS scores for CO2 insufflation were significantly better than air insufflation in the LEC group (P = 0.023) immediately after colonoscopies and up to 4 h afterwards.
CONCLUSION: CO2 insufflation reduced patient pain after colonoscopy in potentially difficult cases when performed by LECs.
CO2 insufflation; Colonoscopy; Difficult colonoscopy; Experienced colonoscopist; Training
AIM: To investigate if high-definition (HD) colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal lesions vs standard white-light instruments.
METHODS: Data were collected from the computerized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 consecutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light (n = 849) or HD+ with i-Scan (n = 252) instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients’ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy (screening, diagnostic or surveillance), type of instrument used (standard white-light or HD+ plus i-Scan), name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or immediately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded.
RESULTS: Eight hundred and forty-nine colonoscopies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD+ plus i-Scan video colonoscope. The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD+ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences between the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures (47.4%). The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD+ plus i-Scan mode (171/252 = 67.9%) than with the standard white-light technique (408/849 = 48.1%) (P < 0.0001). HD+ with i-Scan colonoscopies identified more lesions than standard white-light imaging (459/252 and 807/849, P < 0.0001), in the right or left colon (mean ± SD, 1.62 ± 1.36 vs 1.33 ± 0.73, P < 0.003 and 1.55 ± 0.98 vs 1.17 ± 0.93, P = 0.033), more lesions < 10 mm (P < 0.0001) or nonprotruding (P < 0.022), and flat polyps (P = 0.04). The cumulative mean number of lesions per procedure detected by the four endoscopists was significantly higher with HD+ with i-Scan than with standard white-light imaging (1.82 ± 2.89 vs 0.95 ± 1.35, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: HD imaging with i-Scan during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy significantly increased the detection of colonic mucosal lesions, particularly small and nonprotruding polyps.
Colonoscopy; High-definition+ with i-Scan colonoscopy; White-light colonoscopy; Colonic polyps; Nonprotruding lesions; Adenoma detection rate; Withdrawal time; Surface enhancement; Contrast enhancement; Tone enhancement
(1) The number of endoscopic examinations performed is rising. Epidemiological data and the workload of well developed units show that annual requirements per head of population are approaching: Upper gastrointestinal 1 in 100 Flexible sigmoidoscopy 1 in 500 Colonoscopy 1 in 500 ERCP 1 in 2000 (2) Open access endoscopy to general practitioners is desirable and increasingly sought. For a district general hospital serving a population of 250,000, this workload entails about 3500 procedures annually, performed during 10 half day routine sessions plus emergency work. (3) High standards of training and experience are needed by all staff, who must work in purpose built accommodation designed to promote efficient and safe practice. (4) The endoscopy unit should be adjacent to day care facilities and near the x ray department. There should be easy access to wards. (5) An endoscopy unit needs at least two endoscopy rooms; a fully ventilated cleaning/disinfection area; rooms for patient reception, preparation, and recovery; and accommodation for administration, storage, and staff amenities. (6) The service should be consultant based. At least 10 clinical sessions are required, made up of six or more consultant sessions and two to four clinical assistant, hospital practitioner, or staff specialist sessions. Each consultant should be expected to commit at least two sessions weekly to endoscopy. Extra consultant sessions may be needed to provide an efficient service. (7) A specially trained nursing sister (grade G or H) and five other endoscopy nurses are needed to care for the patients; their work may be supplemented by care assistants. (8) A new post of endoscopy department assistant (analogous to an operating department assistant) is proposed to maintain and prepare instruments, and to give technical assistance during procedures. (9) A full time secretary should be employed. Records, appointments, and audit should be computer based. (10) ERCP needs the collaboration of an interventional radiologist working with high quality x ray equipment in a specially prepared radiology screening room. This facility may need to serve more than one hospital. (11) A gastrointestinal measurement laboratory can conveniently be combined with the endoscopy unit. In some hospitals one or more gastrointestinal measurement technicians may staff this laboratory. (12) An endoscopy unit is a service department analogous to a radiology department. It needs an annual budget.
This paper aimed to assess quality of colonoscopy reports and determine if physicians in practice were already documenting recommended quality indicators, prior to the publication of a standardized Colonoscopy Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) in 2007. We examined 110 colonoscopy reports from 2005-2006 through Maryland Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. We evaluated 25 key data elements recommended by CO-RADS, including procedure indications, risk/comorbidity assessments, procedure technical descriptions, colonoscopy findings, specimen retrieval/pathology. Among 110 reports, 73% documented the bowel preparation quality and 82% documented specific cecal landmarks. For the 177 individual polyps identified, information on size and morphology was documented for 87% and 53%, respectively. Colonoscopy reporting varied considerately in the pre-CO-RADS period. The absence of key data elements may impact the ability to make recommendations for recall intervals. This paper provides baseline data to assess if CO-RADS has an impact on reporting and how best to improve the quality of reporting.
A water method developed to attenuate discomfort during colonoscopy enhanced cecal intubation in unsedated patients. Serendipitously a numerically increased adenoma detection rate (ADR) was noted.
To explore databases of sedated patients examined by the air and water methods to identify hypothesis-generating findings. Design: Retrospective analysis. Setting: VA endoscopy center. Patients: creening colonoscopy. Interventions: From 1/2000–6/2006 the air method was used - judicious air insufflation to permit visualization of the lumen to aid colonoscope insertion and water spray for washing mucosal surfaces. From 6/2006–11/2009 the water method was adopted - warm water infusion in lieu of air insufflation and suction removal of residual air to aid colonoscope insertion. During colonoscope withdrawal adequate air was insufflated to distend the colonic lumen for inspection, biopsy and polypectomy in a similar fashion in both periods. Main outcome measurements: ADR.
The air (n=683) vs. water (n=495) method comparisons revealed significant differences in overall ADR 26.8% (183 of 683) vs. 34.9% (173 of 495) and ADR of adenomas >9 mm, 7.2% vs. 13.7%, respectively (both P<0.05, Fisher's exact test). Limitations: Non-randomized data susceptible to bias by unmeasured parameters unrelated to the methods.
Confirmation of the serendipitous observation of an impact of the water method on ADR provides impetus to call for randomized controlled trials to test hypotheses related to the water method as an approach to improving adenoma detection. Because of recent concerns over missed lesions during colonoscopy, the provocative hypothesis-generating observations warrant presentation.
colorectal cancer screening; optical colonoscopy; water method; adenoma detection
Canadian wait time data are available for the treatment of cancer and heart disease, as well as for joint replacement, cataract surgery and diagnostic imaging procedures. Wait times for gastroenterology consultation and procedures have not been studied, although digestive diseases pose a greater economic burden in Canada than cancer or heart disease.
Specialist physicians completed the practice audit if they provided digestive health care, accepted new patients and recorded referral dates. For patients seen for consultation or investigation over a one-week period, preprogrammed personal digital assistants were used to collect data including the main reason for referral, initial referral and consultation dates, procedure dates (if performed), personal and family history, and patient symptoms, signs and test results. Patient triaging, appropriateness of the referral and timeliness of care were noted.
Over 10 months, 199 physicians recorded details of 5559 referrals, including 1903 visits for procedures. The distribution of total wait times (from referral to procedure) nationally was highly skewed at 91/203 days (median/75th percentile), with substantial interprovincial variation: British Columbia, 66/185 days; Alberta, 134/284 days; Ontario, 110/208 days; Quebec, 71/149 days; New Brunswick, 104/234 days; and Nova Scotia, 42/84 days. The percentage of physicians by province offering average-risk screening colonoscopy varied from 29% to 100%.
Access to specialist gastroenterology care in Canada is limited by long wait times, which exceed clinically reasonable waits for specialist treatment. Although exhibiting some methodological limitations, this large practice audit sampling offers broadly generalized results, as well as a means to identify barriers to health care delivery and evaluate strategies to address these barriers, with the goals of expediting appropriate care for patients with digestive health disorders and ameliorating the personal and societal burdens imposed by digestive diseases.
Access; Digestive diseases; Health care; Practice audit; Wait time
Problem A large audit of colonoscopy in the United Kingdom showed that the unadjusted completion rate was 57% when stringent criteria for identifying the caecum were applied. The caecum should be reached 90% of the time. Little information is available on what units or operators need to do to improve to acceptable levels.
Design Quality improvement programme using two completed cycles of audit.
Setting Endoscopy department in a university linked general hospital in northeast England.
Key measures for improvement Colonoscopy completion rate.
Strategy for change Two audit cycles were completed between 1999 and 2002. Changes to practice were based on results of audit and took into account the opinions of relevant staff. Lack of time for each colonoscopy, poor bowel preparation, especially in frail patients, and a mismatch between number of colonoscopies done and completion rate for individual operators were responsible for failed colonoscopies. Appropriate changes were made.
Effects of change The initial crude colonoscopy completion rate was 60%, improving to 71% after the first round of audit and 88% after the second round, which approximates to the agreed audit standard of 90%. The final adjusted completion rate was 94%.
Lessons learnt Achievement of the national targets in a UK general hospital is possible by lengthening appointments, admitting frail patients for bowel preparation to one ward, and allocating colonoscopies to the most successful operators.
Among patients unlikely to attend a scheduled colonoscopy, we examined the impact of peer coach versus educational brochure support and compared these with concurrent patients who did not receive support.
From health system data, we identified 275 consecutive patients aged >50 who kept <75% of visits to 4 primary care practices and scheduled for a first colonoscopy from February 1, 2005 to August 31, 2006. Using block randomization, we assigned consenting patients to a phone call by a peer coach trained to address barriers to attendance or to a mailed colonoscopy brochure. Study data came from electronic medical records. Odds ratios of colonoscopy attendance were adjusted for demographic, clinical, and health care factors.
Colonoscopy attendance by the peer coach group (N = 70) and brochure group (N = 66) differed by 11% (68.6% vs 57.6%, respectively). Compared with the brochure group, the peer coach group had over twofold greater adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of attendance (2.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99–4.63) as did 49 patients who met the prespecified criteria for needing no support (2.68, 95%CI = 1.05–6.82) but the AORs did not differ significantly for 41 patients who declined support (0.61, 95%CI = 0.25–1.45) and 49 patients who could not be contacted (0.85, 95%CI = 0.36–2.02). Attendance was less likely for black versus white race (AOR = 0.37, 95%CI = 0.19–0.72) but more likely for patients with high versus low primary care visit adherence (AOR = 2.30, 95%CI = 1.04–5.07).
For patients who often fail to keep appointments, peer coach support appears to promote colonoscopy attendance more than an educational brochure.
compliance; colonoscopy; colorectal neoplasms; minority groups; patient-centered care; peer support
Many factors impacting cecal intubation rates have been examined in detail; however, little information exists regarding the effect of the timing of the procedure. We sought to examine any difference in cecal intubation rates between morning and afternoon colonoscopies and identify factors contributing to a discrepancy.
Retrospective, single-center study comparing cecal intubation rates for colonoscopies performed in the morning (begun prior to 12 noon) and colonoscopies performed in the afternoon (begun after 12 noon) over an approximately 12 month period. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed evaluating patient demographics, procedure indication(s), endoscopist, bowel preparation type and quality, and participation by a gastroenterology fellow.
6087 colonoscopies were evaluated in this study. Colonoscopies (n = 3729) performed in the morning were compared to colonoscopies performed in the afternoon (n = 2358). The crude completion rate to the cecum was 95.0% in the morning group while the completion rate to the cecum was 93.6% of the afternoon exams (p = 0.02). The morning colonoscopies had better bowel preparation quality (p < 0.001). The multivariate analyses demonstrated that gender, age, and bowel preparation quality impacted completion rates. After correcting for these factors, there was no significant difference in completion rates in the morning versus afternoon.
Uncorrected cecal intubation rates were lower in the afternoon compared to the morning in outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. Bowel preparation quality was worse in the afternoon compared with the morning. Efforts at improving afternoon bowel preparation may improve the outcome of afternoon colonoscopies.
Provisional reports from the Intercollegiate British Society of
Gastroenterology National Colonoscopy audit show completion rates of 57-77%
for the procedure and poor levels of training and supervision. We
prospectively audited all aspects of colonoscopy performed at a combined
district general hospital and specialist endoscopy unit. Details of referral,
examination, endoscopist, complications and follow-up were recorded and
patients were sent questionnaires for long-term follow-up.
505 patients (246 male) underwent colonoscopy by 27 different endoscopists.
Their median age was 57 years (range 13-92) and 93% were outpatients. 64%
patients were symptomatic and 36% were having surveillance or follow-up
colonoscopy. The overall caecal intubation rate was 93%, with little
difference between surgeons, physicians and experienced trainees (89%, 92%,
94%) and specialist endoscopists (98%). In only one case was an inexperienced
trainee (<100 procedures) unsupervised. Pain scores estimated by the
endoscopist were well matched with those given by the patient—medians 29
and 26 (maximum 100) respectively. Median satisfaction score was 96 (maximum
100). Polyp pick-up rate was 26.9% and there were 11 new cancers. 16 (3%)
minor immediate complications were recorded—5 oversedation, 6 vasovagal
attacks, 3 polypectomy haemorrhages and 2 mucosal injuries (neither requiring
treatment). 3 patients died within 6 months of follow-up but no death was
Completion rates in this setting were adequate for all endoscopists
studied. Patient satisfaction with the procedure was high and very few
immediate or long-term complications were encountered.
The attachment of a transparent hood to the colonoscope tip has been reported to offer some benefits, such as enabling the endoscopist to perform the colonoscopy more easily and to save time. However, there have been no randomized, controlled trials concerning these benefits, nor have any reports been published regarding the use of hoods for the purpose of training colonoscopists. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate the possible benefits of the transparent soft short hood when used by both experienced and trainee endoscopist groups.
This randomized, controlled trial to assess the results of using a transparent soft short hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope was undertaken by two groups of investigators: experienced endoscopists and gastroenterologist trainees. The cecal and ileal intubation times, as well as the doses of sedative medication required, were analyzed.
A total of 112 patients, 65 of whom were female, underwent colonoscopy by 2 endoscopists and 5 gastroenterologist trainees. Colonoscopy was complete in 100% of the patients. The study showed significant shortening of the cecal intubation time when using the soft short hood, in both the endoscopist and gastroenterologist trainee groups (6.8/4.61 min, P = 0.006; and 9.36/7.36 min, P = 0.03). The ileal intubation time had a trend to be significantly less when using the transparent hood in the trainee group (126.4/52.9 s), although this was not statistically significant (P = 0.08). The average dose of propofol, when using the transparent hood, was significantly lower in the endoscopist group (180/120 mg, P = 0.001). No significant complications occurred in the hood or non-hood groups.
The transparent soft short hood shortened the cecal intubation time in both the experienced endoscopist and gastroenterologist trainee groups, as well as reducing the dose of sedative medication required in the experienced endoscopist group. Interestingly, it also reduced the trainee ileal intubation time. The attachment of this type of hood enabled both the experienced endoscopists and gastroenterological trainees to perform colonoscopy more quickly and easily, without any complications.
Transparent hood; Colonoscopy; Cecal intubation time; Ileal intubation time
The frequency of polypectomy is an important indicator of quality assurance for population-based colorectal cancer screening programs. Although administrative databases of physician claims provide population-level data on the performance of polypectomy, the accuracy of the procedure codes has not been examined. We determined the level of agreement between physician claims for polypectomy and documentation of the procedure in endoscopy reports.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving patients aged 50–80 years who underwent colonoscopy at seven study sites in Montréal, Que., between January and March 2007. We obtained data on physician claims for polypectomy from the Régie de l’Assurance Maladie du Québec (RAMQ) database. We evaluated the accuracy of the RAMQ data against information in the endoscopy reports.
We collected data on 689 patients who underwent colonoscopy during the study period. The sensitivity of physician claims for polypectomy in the administrative database was 84.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 78.6%–89.4%), the specificity was 99.0% (95% CI 97.5%–99.6%), concordance was 95.1% (95% CI 93.1%–96.5%), and the kappa value was 0.87 (95% CI 0.83–0.91).
Despite providing a reasonably accurate estimate of the frequency of polypectomy, physician claims underestimated the number of procedures performed by more than 15%. Such differences could affect conclusions regarding quality assurance if used to evaluate population-based screening programs for colorectal cancer. Even when a high level of accuracy is anticipated, validating physician claims data from administrative databases is recommended.
Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is currently performed by different specialties. Information on GI endoscopy resources in Nigeria is limited. Training, cost, availability and maintenance of equipment are some unique challenges. Despite these challenges, the quality and completion rates are important.
Prospective audit of endoscopic procedures by an endoscopist in a Nigerian hospital over a 24 month period.
One hundred and ninety endoscopic procedures were performed in 187 patients (109 male, 78 female) by a surgeon during this period. Mean age was 47.6 years (range 17 - 90 years). All patients were symptomatic. One hundred and twenty-two procedures (64.2%) were upper GI endoscopy, 52 (27.4%) colonoscopy and 16 (8.4%) sigmoidoscopy. Majority of endoscopies 182 (95.8%) were performed electively and only 7 (3.7%) were therapeutic. Upper GI endoscopy findings included 14 (11.5%) cases of peptic ulcer disease, 5 complicated by gastric outlet obstruction, and 21 (17.3%) cases of upper gastrointestinal cancer. Lower gastrointestinal endoscopy findings included 7 cases of polyps, 3 cases of colorectal cancer and 2 cases of diverticulosis. Commonest lesion on lower GI endoscopy was haemorrhoids (41.7%). Adjusted caecal intubation was 81.4% for colonoscopies performed. Overall adenoma detection rate for male and female patients were 18.2% and 5.3% respectively; in patients over 50 years these were 6.3% and 14.3%. Two complications, rupture of oesophageal varices, and respiratory arrest in bulbar palsy patient occurred.
An endoscopist can perform GI endoscopy effectively in developing countries like Nigeria but attention to equipment need and training is important.
Gastrointestinal; endoscopic procedures; audit
Quality endoscopy reporting is essential when community endoscopists perform colonoscopies for veterans who cannot be scheduled at a Veterans Health Administration (VA) facility.
To examine the quality of colonoscopy reports received from community practices and to determine factors associated with more complete reporting, using national documentation guidelines.
Reports submitted to the Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, from 2007 to 2008.
Subjects who underwent fee-basis colonoscopy.
Main Outcome Measurements
Scores created by comparing community reports to published documentation guidelines. Three scores, one for each category of information: Universal Elements (found on all endoscopy reports), Indication Elements (specific to the procedure indication), and Finding Elements (specific to exam findings).
For the 135 included reports, the summary scores were Universal Elements 57.6% [95% Confidence Interval (C.I.) 55%-60%], Indication Elements 73.7% (95% C.I. 69%-78%), and Finding Elements 75.8% (95% C.I. 73%-79%). Examples of poor reporting included patient history (20.7%), last colonoscopy date (18.0%), average versus high risk screening (32.0%), withdrawal time (5.9%), and cecal landmark photographs (45.2%). Only the use of automated reporting software was associated with more thorough reporting.
Modest sample size, mostly male participants, frequent pathological findings, limited geography, and lack of complete reporting by a minority of providers
The overall completeness of colonoscopy reports was low, possibly reflecting a lack of knowledge of reporting guidelines or a lack of agreement regarding important colonoscopy reporting elements. Automated endoscopy software may improve reporting compliance but may not completely standardize reporting quality.
endoscopy reporting; practice guidelines; quality
OBJECTIVES--To survey audit activity in primary care and determine which practice factors are associated with completed audit; to survey the quality of completed audit projects. DESIGN--From April 1992 to June 1993 a team from the medical audit advisory group visited all general practices; a research assistant visited each practice to study the best audit project. Data were collected in structured interviews. SETTING--Staffordshire, United Kingdom. SUBJECTS--All 189 general practices. MAIN MEASURES--Audit activity using Oxford classification system. Quality of best audit project by assessing choice of topic; participation of practice staff; setting of standards; methods of data collection and presentation of results; whether a plan to make changes resulted from the audit; and whether changes led to the set standards being achieved. RESULTS--Audit information was available from 169 practices (89%). 44(26%) practices had carried out at least one full audit; 40(24%) had not started audit. Mean scores with the Oxford classification system were significantly higher with the presence of a practice manager (2.7(95% confidence interval 2.4 to 2.9) v 1.2(0.7 to 1.8), p < 0.0001) and with computerisation (2.8(2.5 to 3.1) v 1.4 (0.9 to 2.0), p < 0.0001), organised notes (2.6(2.1 to 3.0) v 1.7(7.2 to 2.2), p = 0.03), being a training practice (3.5(3.2 to 3.8) v 2.1(1.8 to 2.4), p < 0.0001), and being a partnership (2.8(2.6 to 3.0) v 1.5(1.1 to 2.0), p < 0.0001). Standards had been set in 62 of the 71 projects reviewed. Data were collected prospectively in 36 projects and retrospectively in 35. 16 projects entailed taking samples from a study population and 55 from the whole population. 50 projects had a written summary. Performance was less than the standards set or expected in 56 projects. 62 practices made changes as a result of the audit. 35 of the 53 that had reviewed the changes found that the original standards had been reached. CONCLUSIONS--Evaluation of audit in primary care should include evaluation of the methods used, whether deficiencies were identified, and whether changes were implemented to resolve any problems found.