Literature DB >> 24729991

Practice and documentation of performance of colonoscopy in a central Canadian health region.

Harminder Singh, Lisa Kaita, Gerry Taylor, Zoann Nugent, Charles Bernstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reporting and performance of colonoscopy in a large urban centre.
METHODS: Colonoscopies performed between January and April 2008 in community hospitals and academic centres in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (Manitoba) were identified from hospital discharge databases and retrospective review of a random sample of identified charts. Information regarding reporting of colonoscopies (including bowel preparation, photodocumentation of cecum⁄ileum, size, site, characteristics and method of polyp removal), colonoscopy completion rates and follow-up recommendations was extracted. Colonoscopy completion rates were compared among different groups of physicians.
RESULTS: A total of 797 colonoscopies were evaluated. Several deficiencies in reporting were identified. For example, bowel preparation quality was reported in only 20%, the agent used for bowel preparation was recorded in 50%, photodocumentation of colonoscopy completion in 6% and polyp appearance (ie, pedunculated or not) in 34%, and polyp size in 66%. Although the overall colonoscopy completion rate was 92%, there was a significant difference among physicians with varying medical specialty training and volume of procedures performed. Recommendations for follow-up procedures (barium enema, computed tomography colonography or repeat colonoscopy) were recorded for a minority of individuals with reported poor bowel preparation or incomplete colonoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study found many deficiencies in reporting of colonoscopy in typical, city-wide clinical practices. Colonoscopy completion rates varied among different physician specialties. There is an urgent need to adopt standardized colonoscopy reporting systems in everyday practice and to provide feedback to physicians regarding deficiencies so they can be rectified.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24729991      PMCID: PMC4071923          DOI: 10.1155/2014/635932

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 2291-2789


  15 in total

1.  How good is your dentist? How good is your endoscopist? The quality imperative.

Authors:  David Lieberman
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 22.682

2.  Association between colonoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality in a US cohort according to site of cancer and colonoscopist specialty.

Authors:  Nancy N Baxter; Joan L Warren; Michael J Barrett; Therese A Stukel; V Paul Doria-Rose
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Rate and predictors of early/missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy in Manitoba: a population-based study.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; Zoann Nugent; Alain A Demers; Charles N Bernstein
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 5.  Quality measures for colonoscopy: a critical evaluation.

Authors:  Nabil F Fayad; Charles J Kahi
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 11.382

6.  The effect of periodic monitoring and feedback on screening colonoscopy withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and patient satisfaction scores.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Andrew Arai; Michael Gluck; Geoffrey C Jiranek; Kris V Kowdley; Susan E McCormick; Drew B Schembre; Maw-Soan Soon; Jason A Dominitz
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case-control study.

Authors:  Hermann Brenner; Jenny Chang-Claude; Christoph M Seiler; Alexander Rickert; Michael Hoffmeister
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; Zoann Nugent; Alain A Demers; Erich V Kliewer; Salaheddin M Mahmud; Charles N Bernstein
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-06-20       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Impact of a quarterly report card on colonoscopy quality measures.

Authors:  Charles J Kahi; Darren Ballard; Anand S Shah; Raenita Mears; Cynthia S Johnson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy.

Authors:  Reiko Nishihara; Kana Wu; Paul Lochhead; Teppei Morikawa; Xiaoyun Liao; Zhi Rong Qian; Kentaro Inamura; Sun A Kim; Aya Kuchiba; Mai Yamauchi; Yu Imamura; Walter C Willett; Bernard A Rosner; Charles S Fuchs; Edward Giovannucci; Shuji Ogino; Andrew T Chan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  11 in total

1.  Discrepancy between gastroenterologists' and general surgeons' perspectives on repeat endoscopy in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Arash Azin; M Carolina Jimenez; Michelle C Cleghorn; Timothy D Jackson; Allan Okrainec; Peter G Rossos; Fayez A Quereshy
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.089

2. 

Authors:  James A Dickinson; Nicholas Pimlott; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Olga Szafran; Brenda J Wilson; Stéphane Groulx; Guylène Thériault; Neil R Bell
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Screening: when things go wrong.

Authors:  James A Dickinson; Nicholas Pimlott; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Olga Szafran; Brenda J Wilson; Stéphane Groulx; Guylène Thériault; Neil R Bell
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Adenoma detection rates decline with increasing procedural hours in an endoscopist's workload.

Authors:  Majid A Almadi; Maida Sewitch; Alan N Barkun; Myriam Martel; Lawrence Joseph
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-05-21

5.  Repeat preoperative endoscopy after regional implementation of electronic synoptic endoscopy reporting: a retrospective comparative study.

Authors:  Garrett G R J Johnson; Harminder Singh; Ashley Vergis; Jason Park; Olivia Hershorn; David Hochman; Ramzi M Helewa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Predictors of patient reluctance to wake early in the morning for bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a precolonoscopy survey in city-wide practice.

Authors:  L A Shafer; J R Walker; C Waldman; V Michaud; C Yang; C N Bernstein; L Hathout; J Park; J Sisler; K Wittmeier; G Restall; H Singh
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2018-05-25

7.  The Polyp Manager: a new tool for optimal polyp documentation during colonoscopy. A pilot study.

Authors:  Maartje M van de Meeberg; Rob J Th Ouwendijk; Pieter C J Ter Borg; Sven J van den Hazel; Paul C van de Meeberg
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2016-04-21

Review 8.  A Review on the Quality of Colonoscopy Reporting.

Authors:  Robyn S Sharma; Peter G Rossos
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-04-26

9.  The Quality of Colonoscopy Reporting in Usual Practice: Are Endoscopists Reporting Key Data Elements?

Authors:  S D Hadlock; N Liu; M Bernstein; M Gould; L Rabeneck; A Ruco; R Sutradhar; J M Tinmouth
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-08-07

10.  Perspectives of primary care providers and endoscopists about current practices, facilitators and barriers for preparation and follow-up of colonoscopy procedures: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Gayle Restall; John R Walker; Celeste Waldman; Kathleen Zawaly; Valerie Michaud; Dana Moffat; Harminder Singh
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.