Literature DB >> 30094249

Monitoring of colonoscopy quality indicators in an academic endoscopy facility reveals adherence to international recommendations.

Stefanos Karamaroudis1, Aliki Stamou1, Stamatia C Vorri1, Paraskevas Gkolfakis1, Vasilios Papadopoulos1, Georgios Tziatzios1, Aikaterini Karagouni1, Panagiota Katsouli1, George D Dimitriadis1, Konstantinos Triantafyllou1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We monitor colonoscopy service quality biannually, by measuring sedation administration, colonoscopy completion, adenoma detection and early complications rates (CR). We herein present our audit results for the years 2013 and 2015.
METHODS: In our endoscopy facility, five rotating senior gastroenterologists perform colonoscopies, on a daily basis. We measured the quality indicators in three cohorts: A, intention for total colonoscopy cases; B, cohort A excluding bowel obstruction cases; C, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening cases.
RESULTS: In 2015, overall sedation administration rate (SAR) was 93.0% (91.6-94.4%), achieving our target to give conscious sedation to >90% of patients undergoing colonoscopy in all three cohorts. Colonoscopy completion rate (CCR) increased significantly (P<0.0001) from 94.8% (93.4-96.2%) to 98.1% (97.3-98.9%) in cohort B and numerically from 96.6% (94.4-98.8%) to 98.6% (97.4-99.7%) in cohort C, at the same periods. In cohort C, adenoma detection rates (ADR) were similar-27.1% (21.7-32.5%) and 27% (22.7-31.3%)-in the two periods. There were only two serious early complications: one cardiorespiratory event and one perforation in 2013 and 2015, respectively. While significant variability regarding SAR (ranging from 80% to 100%) was detected among the participating endoscopists, all but one of them constantly achieved [judged by the lower confidence interval (CI) of the quality indicator] CCRs higher than the recommended by international guidelines. On the contrary ADR was variable among endoscopists during the studied periods.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there is certain variability in endoscopists' performance, the overall colonoscopy quality indicators meet or exceed the internationally recommended standards, in our endoscopy facility.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colonoscopy; adenoma detection rate (ADR); colonoscopy completion rate (CCR); indicators; quality

Year:  2018        PMID: 30094249      PMCID: PMC6064800          DOI: 10.21037/atm.2018.03.34

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Transl Med        ISSN: 2305-5839


  22 in total

1.  Sedation-risk-free colonoscopy for minimizing the burden of colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Felix W Leung; Abdulrahman M Aljebreen; Emilio Brocchi; Eugene B Chang; Wei-Chih Liao; Takeshi Mizukami; Melvin Schapiro; Konstantinos Triantafyllou
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-03-16

Review 2.  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

3.  Defining and measuring quality in endoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan Cohen; Irving M Pike
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Increased Rate of Adenoma Detection Associates With Reduced Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Death.

Authors:  Michal F Kaminski; Paulina Wieszczy; Maciej Rupinski; Urszula Wojciechowska; Joanna Didkowska; Ewa Kraszewska; Jaroslaw Kobiela; Robert Franczyk; Maria Rupinska; Bartlomiej Kocot; Anna Chaber-Ciopinska; Jacek Pachlewski; Marcin Polkowski; Jaroslaw Regula
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  Colonoscopy quality measures: experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

Authors:  Thomas J W Lee; Matthew D Rutter; Roger G Blanks; Sue M Moss; Andrew F Goddard; Andrew Chilton; Claire Nickerson; Richard J Q McNally; Julietta Patnick; Colin J Rees
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Serrated and adenomatous polyp detection increases with longer withdrawal time: results from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.

Authors:  Lynn Butterly; Christina M Robinson; Joseph C Anderson; Julia E Weiss; Martha Goodrich; Tracy L Onega; Christopher I Amos; Michael L Beach
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Colonoscopy: practice variation among 69 hospital-based endoscopists.

Authors:  Peter B Cotton; Patrick Connor; Daniel McGee; Paul Jowell; Nick Nickl; Steve Schutz; Joseph Leung; John Lee; Eric Libby
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Optimized sedation improves colonoscopy quality long-term.

Authors:  Konstantinos Triantafyllou; Athanasios D Sioulas; Theodora Kalli; Nikolaos Misailidis; Dimitrios Polymeros; Ioannis S Papanikolaou; George Karamanolis; Spiros D Ladas
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 2.260

9.  The use of propofol as a sedative agent in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Daorong Wang; Chaowu Chen; Jie Chen; Yaxiang Xu; Lu Wang; Zhen Zhu; Denghao Deng; Juan Chen; Aihua Long; Dong Tang; Jun Liu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Quality indicators for gastrointestinal endoscopy units.

Authors:  Lukejohn W Day; Jonathan Cohen; David Greenwald; Bret T Petersen; Nancy S Schlossberg; Joseph J Vicari; Audrey H Calderwood; Frank J Chapman; Lawrence B Cohen; Glenn Eisen; Patrick D Gerstenberger; Ralph David Hambrick; John M Inadomi; Donald MacIntosh; Justin L Sewell; Roland Valori
Journal:  VideoGIE       Date:  2017-05-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.