Literature DB >> 27752813

Annual colonoscopy volume and maintenance of competency for surgeons.

David Pace1,2, Mark Borgaonkar3, Brad Evans4, Curtis Marcoux4, Muna Lougheed4, Vanessa Falk4, Nikita Hickey4, Meghan O'Leary4, Jerry McGrath3, Darrel Boone4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To determine whether the annual case volume of general surgeons (greater or less than 200 colonoscopies) is associated with quality outcomes.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved all adults who underwent colonoscopy by a surgeon in the city of St. John's, NL, during the first 6 months of 2012. Subjects were identified through records from the health authority, and data were recorded on a standardized data sheet. Univariate analysis followed by stepwise multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine whether there was an association between quality outcomes (colonoscopy completion rate, adenoma detection rate) and predictors of these outcomes including annual colonoscopy volume, patient age, gender, indication for colonoscopy, and ASA score. A Chi-squared test was used to determine whether other outcomes were associated with annual colonoscopy volume.
RESULTS: Data were collected on 1060 patients. Mean age was 59.5 (sd 12.2) years with 550 females. A total of 13 surgeons were studied, of which 7 performed less than 200 annual colonoscopies over the previous 2 years (low-volume group) and 6 performed more than 200 annual colonoscopies over the previous 2 years (high-volume group). While there was a significant difference in the colonoscopy completion rate favoring the high-volume group (82.2 vs. 91.1 %, p < 0.001), no difference was noted in the adenoma detection rate between groups (16.7 vs. 17.7 %, p = 0.762). The regression model revealed that colonoscopy completion was also associated with an indication of screening or surveillance and an ASA score of 1 or 2. The adenoma detection rate was associated with older age and male gender. There was no statistically significant association between annual colonoscopy volume and other safety outcome measures.
CONCLUSION: Performing over 200 colonoscopies annually is associated with higher colonoscopy completion rates, but does not appear to be associated with other quality measures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colonoscopy; Quality; Volume–outcome relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27752813     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5275-1

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


  21 in total

1.  Withdrawal time as a quality indicator for colonoscopy - a nationwide analysis.

Authors:  V Moritz; M Bretthauer; H K Ruud; T Glomsaker; T de Lange; P Sandvei; G Huppertz-Hauss; Ø Kjellevold; G Hoff
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 10.093

2.  Experience of the endoscopist increases detection rates of smaller size and higher histological grade polyps.

Authors:  Pablo Solís-Muñoz; José A Solís-Herruzo; Sarbelio Rodríguez-Muñoz
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.029

Review 3.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

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

4.  Volume and accreditation, but not specialty, affect quality standards in colonoscopy.

Authors:  A Bhangu; D M Bowley; R Horner; E Baranowski; S Raman; S Karandikar
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Colorectal cancer in patients under close colonoscopic surveillance.

Authors:  Douglas J Robertson; E Robert Greenberg; Michael Beach; Robert S Sandler; Dennis Ahnen; Robert W Haile; Carol A Burke; Dale C Snover; Robert S Bresalier; Gail McKeown-Eyssen; Jack S Mandel; John H Bond; Rosalind U Van Stolk; Robert W Summers; Richard Rothstein; Timothy R Church; Bernard F Cole; Tim Byers; Leila Mott; John A Baron
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 6.  Seeing better--Evidence based recommendations on optimizing colonoscopy adenoma detection rate.

Authors:  Javier Aranda-Hernández; Jason Hwang; Gabor Kandel
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-02-07       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Nancy N Baxter; Rinku Sutradhar; Shawn S Forbes; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-09-18       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Factors associated with incomplete colonoscopy: a population-based study.

Authors:  Hemant A Shah; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; Therese A Stukel; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2007-03-21       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Colonoscopic factors associated with adenoma detection in a national colorectal cancer screening program.

Authors:  Thomas J W Lee; Colin J Rees; Roger G Blanks; Sue M Moss; Claire Nickerson; Karen C Wright; Peter W James; Richard J Q McNally; Julietta Patnick; Matthew D Rutter
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 10.093

10.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.

Authors:  S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-12-30       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  5 in total

1.  Trends in spatial access to colonoscopy in South Carolina, 2000-2014.

Authors:  Jan M Eberth; Whitney E Zahnd; Michele J Josey; Mario Schootman; Peiyin Hung; Janice C Probst
Journal:  Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol       Date:  2021-03-06

2.  Proximal Sessile Serrated Adenomas Are More Prevalent in Caucasians, and Gastroenterologists Are Better Than Nongastroenterologists at Their Detection.

Authors:  Malav P Parikh; Sujit Muthukuru; Yash Jobanputra; Kushal Naha; Niyati M Gupta; Vaibhav Wadhwa; Rocio Lopez; Prashanthi N Thota; Madhusudhan R Sanaka
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 2.260

3.  Assessment of quality benchmarks in adenoma detection in Mexico.

Authors:  Nancy E Aguilar-Olivos; Ricardo Balanzá; Fernando Rojas-Mendoza; Rodrigo Soto-Solis; Mario A Ballesteros-Amozurrutia; Norma González-Uribe; Justo A Fernández-Rivero
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2021-05-27

4.  Colonoscopy education for surgical residents in Korea: a national survey of Korean Surgical Skill Study Group.

Authors:  Duck-Woo Kim; Min Hyun Kim; Hyun Ae Kim; Kil Yeon Lee; Seung-Yong Jeong; Woo Yong Lee
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2018-08-31       Impact factor: 1.859

5.  Critical aspects in developing curriculum-based assessment for emerging surgical procedures.

Authors:  Ruth Blackham; Jeffrey Hamdorf
Journal:  Int J Med Educ       Date:  2021-12-23
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.