Literature DB >> 26845473

Endoscopist characteristics that influence the quality of colonoscopy.

Rodrigo Jover1, Pedro Zapater2, Luis Bujanda3, Vicent Hernández4, Joaquín Cubiella5, Maria Pellisé6, Marta Ponce7, Akiko Ono8, Angel Lanas9, Agustín Seoane10, José C Marín-Gabriel11, María Chaparro12, Guillermo Cacho13, Alberto Herreros-de-Tejada14, Servando Fernández-Díez15, Antonio Peris16, David Nicolás-Pérez17, Oscar Murcia1, Antoni Castells6, Enrique Quintero17.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Several factors have been shown to be related to colonoscopy quality; however, little is known about the effects of endoscopist factors. This study analyzed the influence of endoscopist-related characteristics on quality indicators for colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 48 endoscopists who each performed at least 20 colonoscopies in the colonoscopy arm of a randomized controlled trial comparing fecal immunochemical test vs. colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. These endoscopists performed a total of 3838 procedures in the trial. The following were calculated for each endoscopist: adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced ADR, proximal ADR, distal ADR, and adenoma per colonoscopy rate (APCR). The characteristics of endoscopists were assessed with regard to colonoscopy quality using multivariate regression analysis. Endoscopist characteristics included age, sex, exclusive endoscopy practice, years as a physician, years as a specialist, specialty, total (life-long) number of colonoscopies performed, annual colonoscopy volume, number of hours/week dedicated to endoscopy and number of educational activities in the previous year.
RESULTS: Factors associated with ADR were age of the endoscopist (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01 - 1.21; P = 0.01) and life-long number of colonoscopies (OR 1.06, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.11; P = 0.01). Only exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice was found to be independently related to proximal ADR (OR 1.71, 95 %CI 1.15 - 2.74; P = 0.001). Life-long number of colonoscopies was independently related to detection of distal adenomas (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.13; P = 0.01). None of the analyzed endoscopist characteristics was associated with advanced ADR or APCR.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the experience of the endoscopist and exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice, but not annual colonoscopy volume, were associated with better colonoscopy quality. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26845473     DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-100185

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


  10 in total

Review 1.  Quality Indicators in Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Kjetil Garborg; Thomas de Lange; Michael Bretthauer
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-09

2.  Endoscopic Eradication Therapy in Barrett's Esophagus.

Authors:  Swathi Eluri; Nicholas J Shaheen
Journal:  Tech Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2017-06-12

3.  Association of Adenoma and Proximal Sessile Serrated Polyp Detection Rates With Endoscopist Characteristics.

Authors:  Shashank Sarvepalli; Ari Garber; Michael B Rothberg; Gautam Mankaney; John McMichael; Gareth Morris-Stiff; John J Vargo; Maged K Rizk; Carol A Burke
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Importance of endoscopist quality metrics for findings at surveillance colonoscopy: The detection-surveillance paradox.

Authors:  Carolina Mangas-Sanjuan; Pedro Zapater; Joaquín Cubiella; Óscar Murcia; Luis Bujanda; Vicent Hernández; David Martínez-Ares; María Pellisé; Agustín Seoane; Ángel Lanas; David Nicolás-Pérez; Alberto Herreros-de-Tejada; María Chaparro; Guillermo Cacho; Servando Fernández-Díez; José-Carlos Marín-Gabriel; Enrique Quintero; Antoni Castells; Rodrigo Jover
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2017-11-24       Impact factor: 4.623

5.  Variable Endoscopist performance in proximal and distal adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Paul James; Mehdi Hegagi; Mae Hegagi; Lilia Antonova; Alaa Rostom; Catherine Dube; Sanjay Murthy; Rakesh Goel; Avijit Chatterjee
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  Changing from two- to one-operator colonoscopy insertion technique is feasible with similar quality outcomes.

Authors:  Hsu-Heng Yen; Yu-Chun Hsu
Journal:  JGH Open       Date:  2018-12-12

Review 7.  When should we perform colonoscopy to increase the adenoma detection rate?

Authors:  Sang Hoon Kim; Jae Hak Kim
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2021-12-16

8.  Colorectal Cancer Screening in China: Status, Challenges, and Prospects - China, 2022.

Authors:  Hongda Chen; Bin Lu; Min Dai
Journal:  China CDC Wkly       Date:  2022-04-15

9.  Predictive factors for missed adenoma on repeat colonoscopy in patients with suboptimal bowel preparation on initial colonoscopy: A KASID multicenter study.

Authors:  Ji Young Chang; Chang Mo Moon; Hyun Jung Lee; Hyo-Joon Yang; Yunho Jung; Sang Wook Kim; Sung-Ae Jung; Jeong-Sik Byeon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 3.240

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

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.