Search

INTRODUCTION: Variation in endoscopist performance contributes to poor-quality colonoscopy. Audit and feedback (A/F) can be used to improve physician performance, particularly among lower performing physicians. In this large pragmatic randomized controlled trial, we compared A/F to improve endoscopists’ colonoscopy performance to usual practice. METHODS: Endoscopists practicing in Ontario, Canada, in 2014 were randomly assigned in October 2015 (index date) to receive (intervention group, n 5 417) or not receive (control group, n 5 416) an A/F report generated centrally using health administrative data. Colonoscopy performance was measured in both groups over two 12-month periods: prereport and postreport (relative to the index date). The primary outcome was polypectomy rate (PR). Secondary outcomes were cecal intubation rate, bowel preparation, and premature repeat after normal colonoscopy. A post hoc analysis used adenoma detection rate as the outcome. Outcomes were compared between groups for all endoscopists and for lower performing endoscopists using Poisson regression analyses under a difference-in-difference framework. RESULTS: Among all endoscopists, PR did not significantly improve from prereport to postreport periods for those receiving the intervention (relative rate [RR], intervention vs control: 1.07 vs 1.05, P 5 0.09). Among lower performing endoscopists, PR improved significantly (RR, intervention vs control 1.34 vs 1.11, P 5 0.02) in the intervention group compared with controls. In this subgroup, adenoma detection rate also improved but not significantly (RR, intervention vs control 1.12 vs 1.04, P 5 0.12). There was no significant improvement in secondary outcomes between the intervention and control groups. DISCUSSION: A/F reports for colonoscopy improve performance in lower performing endoscopists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of high-resolution anoscopy (HRA), anal cytology, and anal human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in screening for histologic high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN 2/3) in HIV-positive MSM., Design: Participants were 401 HIV-positive MSM who were screened for anal cancer in a tertiary care HIV clinic., Methods: A decision analytical model was used to determine the cost-effectiveness of three anal cancer screening strategies: the direct use of HRA; HRA only if anal cytology was abnormal; and HRA only if oncogenic HPV was present. The model included the use of different thresholds for abnormal cytology and also combined cytology and HPV testing. The outcome was the number of AIN 2/3 cases detected. Costs were estimated from institutional data and sensitivity/specificity of cytology and HPV tests were obtained from the screening study., Results: The costs ($ US) per procedure for HRA, cytology, and HPV testing were $193, $90, and $95, respectively. The direct use of HRA was the most cost-effective strategy. It detected 98 individuals with AIN 2/3 and had a cost-effectiveness of $809 per AIN 2/3 case detected. Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, three other strategies had similar costs per case detected and might be as cost-effective as HRA., Conclusion: In HIV-infected MSM, the direct use of HRA is the most cost-effective strategy for detecting AIN 2/3. The higher cost per use for HRA was offset by the high sensitivity and low specificity of HPV and cytology testing.

Objective: To assess anal oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) and anal cytology as screening tests for detecting high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN 2+), as this is an immediate anal cancer precursor., Design: Cross-sectional study of 401 HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM). The endpoint was histologically confirmed AIN 2+ obtained by high-resolution anoscopy. Cytology and biopsy specimens were assigned random numbers and independently assessed by two pathologists., Methods: We did concomitant anal cytology, anal HPV testing and HRA with directed biopsies without knowing the results of each intervention. The main outcome measures were the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of anal cytology and oncogenic HPV for the detection of AIN 2+., Results: Cytology was abnormal in 67% of patients: high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, 12%; low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, 43% and atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, 12%. Biopsies were abnormal in 68% of patients: AIN 2+, 25% and AIN 1, 43%. HPV was detected in 93% with multiple HPV types in 92% and oncogenic HPV types in 88%. Test performance characteristics for the detection of AIN 2+ using any abnormality on anal cytology were: sensitivity 84%, specificity 39%, negative predictive value 88% and positive predictive value 31%; using oncogenic HPV: sensitivity 100%, specificity 16%, negative predictive value 100% and positive predictive value 28%., Conclusion: Anal cytology and HPV detection have high sensitivity but low specificity for detecting AIN 2+. HIV-positive men who have sex with men have a high prevalence of AIN 2+ and require high-resolution anoscopy for optimal detection of high-grade anal dysplasia.