Alexander Lee1, Christopher D Jensen1, Amy R Marks1, Wei K Zhao1, Chyke A Doubeni2, Ann G Zauber3, Virginia P Quinn4, Theodore R Levin1, Douglas A Corley1. 1. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California, USA. 2. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 3. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA. 4. Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist fatigue may impact colonoscopy quality, but prior studies conflict, and minimal data exist from community-based practices where most colonoscopies are performed. METHODS: Within a large, community-based integrated healthcare system, we evaluated the associations among 4 measures of endoscopist fatigue and colonoscopic adenoma detection from 2010 to 2013. Fatigue measures included afternoon versus morning colonoscopy and the number of GI procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, including consideration of prior procedure complexity. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 126 gastroenterologists who performed 259,064 total GI procedures (median, 6 per day; range, 1-24), including 76,445 screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Compared with morning examinations, colonoscopies in the afternoon were not associated with lower adenoma detection for screening examinations, surveillance examinations, or their combination (OR for combination, .99; 95% CI, .96-1.03). The number of procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, with or without consideration of prior procedure complexity, was also not inversely associated with adenoma detection (OR for adenoma detection for colonoscopies in the fourth quartile of fatigue based on the number of prior procedures performed vs colonoscopies performed as the first procedure of the day, .99; 95% CI, .94-1.04). CONCLUSIONS: In a large community-based setting, adenoma detection for screening and surveillance colonoscopies were not associated with either time of day or the number of prior procedures performed by the endoscopist, within the range of procedure volumes evaluated. The lack of association persisted after accounting for prior procedure complexity.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist fatigue may impact colonoscopy quality, but prior studies conflict, and minimal data exist from community-based practices where most colonoscopies are performed. METHODS: Within a large, community-based integrated healthcare system, we evaluated the associations among 4 measures of endoscopist fatigue and colonoscopic adenoma detection from 2010 to 2013. Fatigue measures included afternoon versus morning colonoscopy and the number of GI procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, including consideration of prior procedure complexity. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 126 gastroenterologists who performed 259,064 total GI procedures (median, 6 per day; range, 1-24), including 76,445 screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Compared with morning examinations, colonoscopies in the afternoon were not associated with lower adenoma detection for screening examinations, surveillance examinations, or their combination (OR for combination, .99; 95% CI, .96-1.03). The number of procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, with or without consideration of prior procedure complexity, was also not inversely associated with adenoma detection (OR for adenoma detection for colonoscopies in the fourth quartile of fatigue based on the number of prior procedures performed vs colonoscopies performed as the first procedure of the day, .99; 95% CI, .94-1.04). CONCLUSIONS: In a large community-based setting, adenoma detection for screening and surveillance colonoscopies were not associated with either time of day or the number of prior procedures performed by the endoscopist, within the range of procedure volumes evaluated. The lack of association persisted after accounting for prior procedure complexity.
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
Authors: Suryakanth R Gurudu; Shiva Ratuapli; Russell Heigh; John DiBaise; Jonathan Leighton; Michael Crowell Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Douglas K Rex; Philip S Schoenfeld; Jonathan Cohen; Irving M Pike; Douglas G Adler; M Brian Fennerty; John G Lieb; Walter G Park; Maged K Rizk; Mandeep S Sawhney; Nicholas J Shaheen; Sachin Wani; David S Weinberg Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Jeffrey K Lee; Christopher D Jensen; Alexander Lee; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Theodore R Levin; Wei K Zhao; Douglas A Corley Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Madhusudhan R Sanaka; Fnu Deepinder; Prashanthi N Thota; Rocio Lopez; Carol A Burke Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-06-02 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Yonatan J Hillman; Bari S Hillman; Divyesh V Sejpal; Calvin Lee; Larry S Miller; Petros C Benias; Arvind J Trindade Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Cassandra D L Fritz; Zachary L Smith; Jeffrey Elsner; Thomas Hollander; Dayna Early; Vladimir Kushnir Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2018-05-03 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Ryan T Hoff; Andrew Mazulis; Meghana Doniparthi; Assad Munis; Anne Rivelli; Asif Lakha; Eli Ehrenpreis Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2021-05-27