Search

Abstract: Background: Variations in colonoscopy practice exist, which may be related to healthcare quality. Aims: To determine factors associated with three performance indicators of colonoscopy: complete colonoscopy, adenomatous polyp diagnosis, and duration. Patients: Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy from 21 centres in 11 countries. Methods: This prospective observational study used multiple variable regression analyses to identify determinants of the quality indicators. Results: Six thousand and four patients were included in the study. Patients from private, open-access centres (odds ratio: 3.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.87–5.38) were more likely to have a complete colonoscopy than patients from public, gatekeeper centres. Patients from centres where over 50% of the endoscopists were of senior rank were roughly twice as likely to have an adenoma diagnosed, and longer average withdrawal duration (odds ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.07–1.09) was associated with more frequent adenoma diagnoses. Patients who had difficulty during colonoscopy had longer durations to caecum (time ratio: 2.87, 95% confidence interval: 2.72–3.01) and withdrawal durations (time ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.18–1.33) than patients who had no difficulties. Conclusions: Multiple factors have been identified as being associated with key quality indicators. The non-modifiable factors permit the identification of patients who may be at greater risk of not having quality colonoscopy, while changes to the modifiable factors may help improve the quality of colonoscopy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

BACKGROUND: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to decrease mortality. OBJECTIVE: To examine determinants associated with having (1) a screening colonoscopy, (2) an appropriate indication for screening, and (3) a significant diagnosis at screening. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Twenty-one endoscopy centers from 11 countries. PATIENTS: Asymptomatic patients who underwent a colonoscopy for the purpose of detecting CRC and who did not have a history of polyps or CRC, a lesion observed at a recent barium enema or sigmoidoscopy, or a recent positive fecal occult blood test. INTERVENTION: Screening colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Appropriateness according to the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) criteria and significant diagnoses (cancer, adenomatous polyps, new diagnoses of inflammatory bowel disease, angiodysplasia). RESULTS: Of 5069 colonoscopies, 561 (11%) were performed for screening purposes. Patients were more likely to have a screening colonoscopy if they were aged 45 to 54 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.60-3.99). Screening colonoscopies were appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate in 26%, 60%, and 14% of cases, respectively. Eighty-one significant diagnoses were made, including 4 cancers. Significant diagnoses were more often made for uncertain/appropriate indications (OR 3.20, 95% CI 1.12-9.17) than for inappropriate indications. LIMITATIONS: Although data completeness was asked of all centers, it is possible that not all consecutive patients were included. Participating centers were a convenience sample and thus may not be representative. CONCLUSIONS: About 1 of 10 colonoscopies were performed for screening, preferentially in middle-aged individuals. A higher diagnostic yield in uncertain/appropriate indications suggests that the use of appropriateness criteria may enhance the efficient use of colonoscopy for screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]