Literature DB >> 19626186

Epidemiology and quality control of 245 000 outpatient colonoscopies.

Ulrich Mansmann1, Alexander Crispin, Volkmar Henschel, Christine Adrion, Volker Augustin, Berndt Birkner, Axel Munte.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Screening colonoscopy is an effective means for early detection of colorectal carcinoma. Any exhaustive evaluation of the method must take further factors into account: epidemiology of colorectal adenomas and carcinomas in the target population, acceptance by the patients, structure, process, and outcome quality, and health economics.
METHODS: The internet-based colonoscopy database of the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (ASHIP) for the year 2006 includes data on 86.05% of all outpatient colonoscopies performed in Bavarian ASHIP patients, or a total of 245 263 documented examinations.
RESULTS: The rate of participation in preventive colonoscopies was low (1.5%) and showed considerable geographical variation. The rate of detection of histologically confirmed colorectal neoplasia in symptom-free screened individuals was almost 26.0%. Some 1.3% of those screened had colorectal carcinoma. In 76.31% of the participants a completely clean gut was achieved. The incidence of bleeding, perforation, and cardiorespiratory complications was 0.22%, 0.03%, and 0.06%, respectively. DISCUSSION: The complication rate of outpatient colonoscopy is on the order of tenths of a percent, while the process quality is high. The rate of detection of colorectal adenoma and carcinoma is high and the projected benefits for public health are considerable, but the rate of participation is too low.

Entities:  

Keywords:  colonoscopy; epidemiology; prevention; quality control; screening

Year:  2008        PMID: 19626186      PMCID: PMC2696904          DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0434

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int        ISSN: 1866-0452            Impact factor:   5.594


  20 in total

1.  Con: screening colonoscopy in the extreme elderly is not a wise choice.

Authors:  Gregory S Cooper
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Screening colonoscopy in the elderly: more reasons for refusal.

Authors:  Michael Kirsch
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Screening colonoscopy in very elderly patients: judgment versus dogma.

Authors:  Otto S Lin
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 4.  Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Screening colonoscopy in very elderly patients: prevalence of neoplasia and estimated impact on life expectancy.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Drew B Schembre; Kamran Ayub; Michael Gluck; Fred Drennan; Maw-Soan Soon; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  With screening colonoscopy, what you see is what you get.

Authors:  Paul J Limburg
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia.

Authors:  Jaroslaw Regula; Maciej Rupinski; Ewa Kraszewska; Marcin Polkowski; Jacek Pachlewski; Janina Orlowska; Marek P Nowacki; Eugeniusz Butruk
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-11-02       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Survival of elderly persons undergoing colonoscopy: implications for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance.

Authors:  Charles J Kahi; Faouzi Azzouz; Beth E Juliar; Thomas F Imperiale
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  [Results of coloscopy screening in 2005--an Internet-based documentation].

Authors:  A Sieg; A Theilmeier
Journal:  Dtsch Med Wochenschr       Date:  2006-02-24       Impact factor: 0.628

10.  Follow-up after colorectal polypectomy: a benefit-risk analysis of German surveillance recommendations.

Authors:  F Becker; G Nusko; J Welke; E G Hahn; U Mansmann
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  9 in total

1.  Detection of relevant colonic neoplasms with PET/CT: promising accuracy with minimal CT dose and a standardised PET cut-off.

Authors:  Wolfgang Luboldt; Teresa Volker; Bärbel Wiedemann; Klaus Zöphel; Ursula Wehrmann; Arne Koch; Todd Toussaint; Nasreddin Abolmaali; Markus Middendorp; Daniela Aust; Jörg Kotzerke; Frank Grünwald; Thomas J Vogl; Hans-Joachim Luboldt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  [Principles and fields of application of screening procedures].

Authors:  M Blettner; C Spix
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 0.743

3.  [Pneumothorax following preventive colonoscopy].

Authors:  A Ring; S Usta; J Stern
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  [Spleen ruptures after screening colonoscopy].

Authors:  P Stauch; P Dietrich; M Bernhard; D Jaspersen; A Gries; A Hellinger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Bernt-Peter Robra
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

6.  Screening: part 19 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.

Authors:  Claudia Spix; Maria Blettner
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 5.594

7.  Risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia according to age and gender.

Authors:  Frank T Kolligs; Alexander Crispin; Axel Munte; Andreas Wagner; Ulrich Mansmann; Burkhard Göke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Inter-physician variation in follow-up colonoscopies after screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Christian Stock; Michael Hoffmeister; Berndt Birkner; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Evaluating the effects of a risk-adapted screening program for familial colorectal cancer in individuals between 25 and 50 years of age: study protocol for the prospective population-based intervention study FARKOR.

Authors:  Sabine Hoffmann; Alexander Crispin; Doris Lindoerfer; Gaby Sroczynski; Uwe Siebert; Ulrich Mansmann; Farkor Consortium
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 3.067

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.