Literature DB >> 22961527

Volume and accreditation, but not specialty, affect quality standards in colonoscopy.

A Bhangu1, D M Bowley, R Horner, E Baranowski, S Raman, S Karandikar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Global Rating Scale, defined by the Joint Advisory Group for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, requires monitoring of endoscopic performance indicators. There are known variations in colonoscopic performance, and investigation of factors causing this is needed. This study aimed to analyse the impact of endoscopist specialty and procedural volume on the quality of colonoscopy.
METHODS: Data collected prospectively from a UK hospital endoscopy service between June 2007 and January 2010 were analysed. The main endpoint was the adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary endpoints were polyp detection rate (PDR), reported caecal intubation rate (CIR) and reported complications. Multivariable binary regression models were built to adjust for confounding patient-level and endoscopist-level variation.
RESULTS: A total of 10,026 colonoscopies were included, with an overall ADR of 19.2 per cent, a CIR of 90.2 per cent and a perforation rate of 0.06 per cent. In univariable analyses, surgeons had a higher ADR and higher PDR, but lower CIR, compared with physicians. Surgeons had a significantly different case mix in terms of age, sex and indication for colonoscopy. After adjusting for this case mix in multivariable analysis, specialty was no longer a significant predictor of ADR; however, surgeons retained their higher PDR and physicians their higher CIR. Endoscopists accredited for screening and those performing more than 100 colonoscopies per year had a higher ADR.
CONCLUSION: Adjusting for case mix, physicians and surgeons performed equally well in terms of ADR. Accreditation and a higher annual number of colonoscopies were more important factors in achieving quality standards.
Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22961527     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8866

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  17 in total

1.  Significant Variation in the Detection Rates of Proximal Serrated Polyps Among Academic Gastroenterologists, Community Gastroenterologists, and Colorectal Surgeons in a Single Tertiary Care Center.

Authors:  Rohan Mandaliya; Kamal Baig; Michele Barnhill; Vagishwari Murugesan; Aniruddh Som; Usman Mohammed; Khushali Jhaveri; Shiva Shankar Vangimalla; Allyson Raymond; Jennifer Tran; Lubaba Hasan; James H Lewis; Won Cho
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Detection rates of premalignant polyps during screening colonoscopy: time to revise quality standards?

Authors:  William A Ross; Selvi Thirumurthi; Patrick M Lynch; Asif Rashid; Mala Pande; Mehnaz A Shafi; Jeffrey H Lee; Gottumukkala S Raju
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-01-10       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Who Performs Colonoscopy? Workforce Trends Over Space and Time.

Authors:  Jan M Eberth; Michele J Josey; Lee R Mobley; Davidson O Nicholas; Donna B Jeffe; Cassie Odahowski; Janice C Probst; Mario Schootman
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  Guidelines for privileging and credentialing physicians in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan Pearl; Erika Fellinger; Brian Dunkin; Eric Pauli; Thadeus Trus; Jeffrey Marks; Robert Fanelli; Michael Meara; Dimitrios Stefanidis; William Richardson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Annual colonoscopy volume and maintenance of competency for surgeons.

Authors:  David Pace; Mark Borgaonkar; Brad Evans; Curtis Marcoux; Muna Lougheed; Vanessa Falk; Nikita Hickey; Meghan O'Leary; Jerry McGrath; Darrel Boone
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Trends in spatial access to colonoscopy in South Carolina, 2000-2014.

Authors:  Jan M Eberth; Whitney E Zahnd; Michele J Josey; Mario Schootman; Peiyin Hung; Janice C Probst
Journal:  Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol       Date:  2021-03-06

7.  Impact of the National Endoscopy Database (NED) on colonoscopy withdrawal time: a tertiary centre experience.

Authors:  Mohamed G Shiha; Ammar Al-Rifaie; Mo Thoufeeq
Journal:  BMJ Open Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-07

8.  Endoscopist specialty is associated with colonoscopy quality.

Authors:  Mengzhu Jiang; Maida J Sewitch; Alan N Barkun; Lawrence Joseph; Robert J Hilsden
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  Screening colonoscopy: should we focus more on technique and less on technology?

Authors:  Noor Mohammed; Venkataraman Subramanian
Journal:  F1000Prime Rep       Date:  2013-08-01

10.  Effect of Colonoscopy Volume on Quality Indicators.

Authors:  David Pace; Mark Borgaonkar; Muna Lougheed; Curtis Marcoux; Brad Evans; Nikita Hickey; Meghan O'Leary; Darrell Boone; Jerry McGrath
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-05-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.