Literature DB >> 26808396

Monitoring colonoscopy withdrawal time significantly improves the adenoma detection rate and the performance of endoscopists.

Stephan R Vavricka1, Michael C Sulz2, Lukas Degen3, Roman Rechner2, Michael Manz4, Luc Biedermann2, Christoph Beglinger3, Shajan Peter3, Ekaterina Safroneeva5, Gerhard Rogler2, Alain M Schoepfer6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The recommended minimum withdrawal time for screening colonoscopy is 6 minutes. Adenoma detection rates (ADRs) increase with longer withdrawal times. We aimed to compare withdrawal times and ADRs of endoscopists unaware of being monitored vs. aware. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven experienced gastroenterologists prospectively performed 558 screening colonoscopies during a 9-month period in a Swiss University hospital. Colonoscopy withdrawal times were first measured without the gastroenterologists’ knowledge of being monitored (n = 355 colonoscopies) and then with their knowledge (n = 203 colonoscopies).
RESULTS: The median withdrawal time when gastroenterologists were unaware of being monitored was 4.5 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 4 – 5.5 minutes) without intervention and 6 minutes (IQR 4 – 9 minutes) with intervention, increasing significantly to 7.3 minutes (IQR 6.5 – 9 minutes) and 8 minutes (IQR 7 – 11 minutes), respectively, when they were aware of being monitored (P < 0.001 both for colonoscopies with and without intervention). The ADR increased from 21.4 % when the gastroenterologists were unaware of being monitored to 36.0 % when they were aware (P < 0.001). In the multivariate regression model, the endoscopists knowing they were being monitored was the strongest factor associated with ADR (odds ratio 4.417; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.241 – 8.705; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy withdrawal time in unmonitored gastroenterologists is shorter than recommended and increases with awareness of monitoring. ADR significantly increases when gastroenterologists are aware of being monitored. Implementation of systematic monitoring, and analysis of withdrawal time and ADR for each endoscopist may help to increase the ADR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26808396     DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1569674

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  15 in total

Review 1.  Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative.

Authors:  Michal F Kaminski; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Marek Bugajski; Michael Bretthauer; Colin J Rees; Evelien Dekker; Geir Hoff; Rodrigo Jover; Stepan Suchanek; Monika Ferlitsch; John Anderson; Thomas Roesch; Rolf Hultcranz; Istvan Racz; Ernst J Kuipers; Kjetil Garborg; James E East; Maciej Rupinski; Birgitte Seip; Cathy Bennett; Carlo Senore; Silvia Minozzi; Raf Bisschops; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Cristiano Spada; Cesare Hassan; Mario Dinis-Ribeiro; Matthew D Rutter
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 2.  Strategies to Increase Adenoma Detection Rates.

Authors:  Eelco C Brand; Michael B Wallace
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03

3.  Difference in Physician- and Patient-Dependent Factors Contributing to Adenoma Detection Rate and Serrated Polyp Detection Rate.

Authors:  Maryan Cavicchi; Gaëlle Tharsis; Pascal Burtin; Philippe Cattan; Franck Venezia; Gilles Tordjman; Agnès Gillet; Joëlle Samama; Karine Nahon-Uzan; David Karsenti
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 4.  Challenges Facing the Detection of Colonic Polyps: What Can Deep Learning Do?

Authors:  Samy A Azer
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 2.430

5.  Guidelines for accreditation of endoscopy units: quality measures from the Korean Society of Coloproctology.

Authors:  Rumi Shin; Seongdae Lee; Kyung-Su Han; Dae Kyung Sohn; Sang Hui Moon; Dong Hyun Choi; Bong-Hyeon Kye; Hae-Jung Son; Sun Il Lee; Sumin Si; Won-Kyung Kang
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 1.859

6.  Does the withdrawal time affect adenoma detection in non-screening colonoscopies?

Authors:  Ammar Al-Rifaie; Mohammed El-Feki; Ismaeel Al-Talib; Maysam Abdulwahid; Andrew Hopper; Mo Thoufeeq
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-03-16

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.  Cap-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: is the cap beneficial? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Fazia A Mir; Christine Boumitri; Imran Ashraf; Michelle L Matteson-Kome; Douglas L Nguyen; Srinivas R Puli; Matthew L Bechtold
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-07-24

9.  Improved detection of adenomas and sessile serrated polyps is maintained with continuous audit of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Alan Gordon Fraser; Toby Rose; Philip Wong; Mark Lane; Paul Frankish
Journal:  BMJ Open Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-07

10.  Will purposely seeking detect more colorectal polyps than routine performing during colonoscopy?

Authors:  Yanliu Chu; Juan Zhang; Ping Wang; Tian Li; Shuyi Jiang; Qinfu Zhao; Feng Liu; Xiaozhong Gao; Xiuli Qiao; Xiaofeng Wang; Zhenhe Song; Heye Liang; Jing Yue; Enqiang Linghu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.