Literature DB >> 24477935

Differences in colonoscopy technique impact quality.

S Kravochuck1, R Gao, J Church.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopists differ in skill, technique, and attitude in relation to the examination. These differences have a potential impact on the quality of the examination and the risk of complications. This study aimed to document differences in technique between individual colonoscopists and to explore some possible consequences to the patient and the examination.
METHODS: This prospective, comparative study analyzed 10 individual endoscopists practicing in outpatient endoscopy clinics at a major medical center. Consecutive patients presenting for elective outpatient colonoscopy were included in the study. Examinations were observed, and techniques used during scope insertion and withdrawal were recorded. The type and dose of medication, the pain score recorded by the endoscopy nurses (scale of 1-10), and the incidence of hypotension and hypoxia were noted.
RESULTS: The study involved 245 patients (129 men and 116 women) with a mean age of 59.5 years. The number of colonoscopies per examiner ranged from 12 to 31, with nine tenths of the examiners performing more than 20 colonoscopies. Completion rates ranged from 82.6 to 100 %; the withdrawal time averages ranged from 3.5 to 21.7 min; and the average number of techniques used ranged from one per four exams to three per exam. The average pain score per endoscopist ranged from 2.1 to 4.3, and the percentage of patients with either hypoxia or hypotension ranged from 11.5 to 85.0 %. A sedation/analgesia product (SAP) was derived by multiplying the mean dose of versed by the mean dose of meperidine. Regression analysis showed significant relationships between the number of techniques used and the levels of pain (R (2) = 0.395) and hypoxia/hypotension (R (2) = 0.513). The findings showed that SAP was significantly associated with hypoxia/hypotension (R (2) = 0.826) but not pain (R (2) = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of ancillary techniques for colonoscope insertion minimizes pain, narcotic use, and hypoxia/hypotension. The product of benzodiazepine dose and narcotic dose is a good way of assessing sedative effect.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24477935     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3355-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  13 in total

Review 1.  Colonoscoping the "difficult" colon.

Authors:  W A Webb
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 0.688

2.  The technique of abdominal pressure in total colonoscopy.

Authors:  J D Waye; S A Yessayan; B S Lewis; T L Fabry
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1991 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Ancillary colonoscope insertion techniques. An evaluation.

Authors:  J M Church
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Methods of reducing discomfort during colonoscopy.

Authors:  Felix W Leung
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Unsedated colonoscopy: patient characteristics and satisfaction in a community-based endoscopy unit.

Authors:  John L Petrini; James V Egan; William V Hahn
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  The variable stiffness colonoscope: assessment of efficacy by magnetic endoscope imaging.

Authors:  Syed G Shah; Jim C Brooker; Christopher B Williams; Catherine Thapar; Noriko Suzuki; Brian P Saunders
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 7.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures.

Authors:  Kenneth R McQuaid; Loren Laine
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 8.  Endoscopist-directed administration of propofol: a worldwide safety experience.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Viju P Deenadayalu; Emely Eid; Thomas F Imperiale; John A Walker; Kuldip Sandhu; Anthony C Clarke; Lybus C Hillman; Akira Horiuchi; Lawrence B Cohen; Ludwig T Heuss; Shajan Peter; Christoph Beglinger; James A Sinnott; Thomas Welton; Magdy Rofail; Iyad Subei; Rodger Sleven; Paul Jordan; John Goff; Patrick D Gerstenberger; Harold Munnings; Martin Tagle; Brian W Sipe; Till Wehrmann; Jack A Di Palma; Kaitlin E Occhipinti; Egidio Barbi; Andrea Riphaus; Stephen T Amann; Gen Tohda; Timothy McClellan; Charles Thueson; John Morse; Nizam Meah
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2009-06-21       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 9.  Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; William Poluha; Mary Cheung; Nicole Choptain; Ken I Baron; Shayne P Taback
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2008-10-08

10.  Use of an electromagnetic colonoscope to assess maneuvers associated with cecal intubation.

Authors:  Russell I Heigh; John K DiBaise; James A Prechel; Billie J Horn; Sarah San Miguel; Evelyn G Heigh; Jonathan A Leighton; Cynthia J Edgelow; David E Fleischer
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-04-09       Impact factor: 3.067

View more
  5 in total

1.  The use of ancillary techniques to aid colonoscope insertion.

Authors:  Xhileta Xhaja; James Church
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Efficacy and safety of the starting position during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jun Watanabe; Daeho Park; Eiichi Kakehi; Kazuoki Inoue; Shizukiyo Ishikawa; Yuki Kataoka
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-06-16

3.  Factors for cecal intubation time during colonoscopy in women: Impact of surgical history.

Authors:  Ji Hyung Nam; Jung Hyeon Lee; Jae Hak Kim; Hyoun Woo Kang; Dong Kee Jang; Yun Jeong Lim; Moon-Soo Koh; Hyun Soo Park; Eun-Cheol Park; Jun Kyu Lee; Jin Ho Lee
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.485

4.  Sedative effect of remimazolam combined with alfentanil in colonoscopic polypectomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Yueyang Xin; Tiantian Chu; Jinxu Wang; Aijun Xu
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 2.376

5.  Colonoscopy procedure simulation: virtual reality training based on a real time computational approach.

Authors:  Tingxi Wen; David Medveczky; Jackie Wu; Jianhuang Wu
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.819

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.