AIM: Completeness and thoroughness of colonoscopy are measured by the caecal intubation rate (CIR) and the adenoma detection rate (ADR). National standards are ≥ 90% and ≥ 10% respectively. Variability in CIR and ADR have been demonstrated but comparison between individuals and units is difficult. We aimed to assess the performance of colonoscopy in endoscopy units in the northeast of England. METHOD: Data on colonoscopy performance and sedation use were collected over 3 months from 12 units. Colonoscopies performed by screening colonoscopists were included for the CIR only. Funnel plots with upper and lower 95% confidence limits for CIR and ADR were created. RESULTS: CIR was 92.5% (n = 5720) and ADR 15.9% (n = 4748). All units and 128 (99.2%) colonoscopists were above the lower limit for CIR. All units achieved the ADR standard with 10 above the upper limit. Ninety-nine (76.7%) colonoscopists were above 10%, 16 (12.4%) above the upper limit and 7 (5.4%) below the lower limit. Median medication doses were 2.2 mg midazolam, 29.4 mg pethidine and 83.3 μg fentanyl. In all, 15.1% of colonoscopies were unsedated. Complications were bleeding (0.10%) and perforation (0.02%). There was one death possibly related to bowel preparation. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that colonoscopies are performed safely and to a high standard. Funnel plots can highlight variability and areas for improvement. Analyses of ADR presented graphically around the global mean suggest that the national standard should be reset at 15%.
AIM: Completeness and thoroughness of colonoscopy are measured by the caecal intubation rate (CIR) and the adenoma detection rate (ADR). National standards are ≥ 90% and ≥ 10% respectively. Variability in CIR and ADR have been demonstrated but comparison between individuals and units is difficult. We aimed to assess the performance of colonoscopy in endoscopy units in the northeast of England. METHOD: Data on colonoscopy performance and sedation use were collected over 3 months from 12 units. Colonoscopies performed by screening colonoscopists were included for the CIR only. Funnel plots with upper and lower 95% confidence limits for CIR and ADR were created. RESULTS: CIR was 92.5% (n = 5720) and ADR 15.9% (n = 4748). All units and 128 (99.2%) colonoscopists were above the lower limit for CIR. All units achieved the ADR standard with 10 above the upper limit. Ninety-nine (76.7%) colonoscopists were above 10%, 16 (12.4%) above the upper limit and 7 (5.4%) below the lower limit. Median medication doses were 2.2 mg midazolam, 29.4 mg pethidine and 83.3 μg fentanyl. In all, 15.1% of colonoscopies were unsedated. Complications were bleeding (0.10%) and perforation (0.02%). There was one death possibly related to bowel preparation. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that colonoscopies are performed safely and to a high standard. Funnel plots can highlight variability and areas for improvement. Analyses of ADR presented graphically around the global mean suggest that the national standard should be reset at 15%.
Authors: Thomas Jw Lee; Keith Siau; Shiran Esmaily; James Docherty; John Stebbing; Matthew J Brookes; Raphael Broughton; Peter Rogers; Paul Dunckley; Matthew D Rutter Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Colin J Rees; Sara Koo; John Anderson; Mark McAlindon; Andrew M Veitch; Allan John Morris; Pradeep Bhandari; James E East; George Webster; Kofi W Oppong; Ian D Penman Journal: Frontline Gastroenterol Date: 2019-01-18
Authors: Matthew D Rutter; Carlo Senore; Raf Bisschops; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Michal F Kaminski; Cristiano Spada; Michael Bretthauer; Cathy Bennett; Cristina Bellisario; Silvia Minozzi; Cesare Hassan; Colin Rees; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro; Tomas Hucl; Thierry Ponchon; Lars Aabakken; Paul Fockens Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Amanda J Cross; Emma C Robbins; Kevin Pack; Iain Stenson; Paula L Kirby; Bhavita Patel; Matthew D Rutter; Andrew M Veitch; Brian P Saunders; Matthew Little; Alastair Gray; Stephen W Duffy; Kate Wooldrage Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2022-05 Impact factor: 4.106
Authors: Roisin Bevan; Wee Sing Ngu; Brian P Saunders; Zacharias Tsiamoulos; Paul Bassett; Zoe Hoare; Colin J Rees Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2015-11-27
Authors: Colin J Rees; Roisin Bevan; Katharina Zimmermann-Fraedrich; Matthew D Rutter; Douglas Rex; Evelien Dekker; Thierry Ponchon; Michael Bretthauer; Jaroslaw Regula; Brian Saunders; Cesare Hassan; Michael J Bourke; Thomas Rösch Journal: Gut Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Colin J Rees; Siwan Thomas Gibson; Matt D Rutter; Phil Baragwanath; Rupert Pullan; Mark Feeney; Neil Haslam Journal: Gut Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 23.059