Literature DB >> 12137162

Successful colonoscopy; completion rates and reasons for incompletion.

R M S Mitchell1, K McCallion, K R Gardiner, R G P Watson, J S A Collins.   

Abstract

Factors such as poor bowel preparation or obstructing colonic disease may confound the reporting of colonoscopy completion rates, as these factors are outside of the control of the endoscopist performing the procedure. By adjusting for these factors when calculating a colonoscopy completion rate, it may be possible to make a more accurate assessment of a unit's or individuals' competence. Details of two thousand two hundred and sixteen colonoscopies performed by four consultants and their trainees between 1993-2000 were analysed retrospectively from a prospective endoscopy database. Crude (all cases) and adjusted (excluding poor bowel preparation and disease as causes of incompletion) rates were recorded for each sex, and by age according to cause. Overall crude and adjusted completion rates were 77.9% and 85.0% respectively. There was a significant difference between male and female completion rates due to a difference in the incidence of excess looping and intolerance of the procedure (adjusted rate 88.9% in males vs. 81.6% in females, p<0.05). There was a non-significant trend to lower completion rates in patients over 75 years of age compared to younger patients. Completion rates were significantly higher following bowel resection (adjusted rates 93.5% vs. 82.8%, p<0.05). There was no significant difference between completion rates for inpatient and outpatient referrals (P=0.36). Reporting colonoscopy completion rates by adjusting for factors such as poor bowel preparation and obstructing colonic disease allows for direct comparisons of completion rates reported by different units. Reporting completion rates in this way also highlights the effect of inadequate bowel preparation on successful colonoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12137162      PMCID: PMC2475359     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ulster Med J        ISSN: 0041-6193


  19 in total

1.  Competency and the colonoscopist: a learning curve.

Authors:  B R Parry; S M Williams
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1991-06

2.  Photodocumentation of total colonoscopy: how successful are endoscopists? Do reviewers agree?

Authors:  J B Marshall; D N Brown
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  A new variable stiffness colonoscope makes colonoscopy easier: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  J C Brooker; B P Saunders; S G Shah; C B Williams
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  Should colonoscopy be the first investigation for colonic disease?

Authors:  D C Lindsay; J G Freeman; I Cobden; C O Record
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1988-01-16

5.  Technical proficiency of trainees performing colonoscopy: a learning curve.

Authors:  J B Marshall
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a randomized prospective trail comparing sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol in a predominantly elderly population.

Authors:  A Thomson; P Naidoo; B Crotty
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 4.029

7.  Colonoscopy or barium enema as initial investigation of colonic disease.

Authors:  P Durdey; P M Weston; N S Williams
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1987-09-05       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Angiodysplasia--an uncommon cause of colonic bleeding: colonoscopic evaluation of 1,050 patients with rectal bleeding and anaemia.

Authors:  B J Danesh; C Spiliadis; C B Williams; C M Zambartas
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Why is colonoscopy more difficult in women?

Authors:  B P Saunders; M Fukumoto; S Halligan; C Jobling; M E Moussa; C I Bartram; C B Williams
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Colonoscopy findings in symptomatic patients without X-ray evidence of colonic neoplasms.

Authors:  M C Aldridge; A J Sim
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-10-11       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  21 in total

1.  Quality improvement programme to achieve acceptable colonoscopy completion rates: prospective before and after study.

Authors:  Jennifer E Ball; Jane Osbourne; Sarah Jowett; Mike Pellen; Mark R Welfare
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-09-18

2.  Endoscopic management of failed colonoscopy in clinical practice: to change endoscopist, instrument, or both?

Authors:  Sergio Morini; Angelo Zullo; Cesare Hassan; Roberto Lorenzetti; Salvatore M A Campo
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  CT colonography with fecal tagging after incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  S Gryspeerdt; P Lefere; M Herman; R Deman; L Rutgeerts; G Ghillebert; F Baert; M Baekelandt; B Van Holsbeeck
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  The frequency of early repeat tests after colonoscopy in elderly medicare recipients.

Authors:  Robert J Richards; Stephen Crystal
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  The in-patient colonoscopy: a difficult endeavor.

Authors:  Robert Enns; Darin Krygier
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 6.  Mechanical analysis of insertion problems and pain during colonoscopy: why highly skill-dependent colonoscopy routines are necessary in the first place... and how they may be avoided.

Authors:  Arjo J Loeve; Paul Fockens; Paul Breedveld
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 7.  Magnetic endoscopic imaging vs standard colonoscopy: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Yi Chen; Yu-Ting Duan; Qin Xie; Xian-Peng Qin; Bo Chen; Lin Xia; Yong Zhou; Ning-Ning Li; Xiao-Ting Wu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Relationship between health literacy and quality of colonoscopy bowel preparation.

Authors:  Umut Eren Erdoğdu; Hacı Murat Çaycı; Ali Tardu; Ufuk Arslan; Hakan Demirci; Çınar Yıldırım
Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 1.852

9.  Fecal tag CT colonography with a limited 2-day bowel preparation following incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  Kaan Meric; Nuray Bakal; Sibel Aydin; Atakan Yesil; Kemal Tekesin; Masum Simsek
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 10.  Cancer Care Ontario Colonoscopy Standards: standards and evidentiary base.

Authors:  L Rabeneck; R B Rumble; J Axler; A Smith; D Armstrong; C Vinden; P Belliveau; K Rhodes; C Zwaal; V Mai; P Dixon
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.522

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.