Comparative Study
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.017. The effect of periodic monitoring and feedback on screening colonoscopy withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and patient satisfaction scoresAffiliations
AffiliationItem in Clipboard
Comparative Study
The effect of periodic monitoring and feedback on screening colonoscopy withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and patient satisfaction scoresOtto S Lin et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Jun.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.017. AffiliationItem in Clipboard
AbstractBackground: Previous studies showed a correlation between mean withdrawal times during screening colonoscopy and polyp/neoplasia detection rates.
Objectives: To assess the effect of a monitoring and feedback program on withdrawal times, polyp/neoplasia detection rates, and patient satisfaction.
Design: Comparison of retrospective and prospective data.
Setting: Teaching hospital.
Patients: Asymptomatic adults undergoing screening colonoscopy.
Interventions: Monitoring and feedback program.
Main outcome measurements: Withdrawal times, polyp and neoplasia detection rates, and patient satisfaction scores.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 850 screening colonoscopies, recording withdrawal times, polyp findings, and patient satisfaction scores. All procedures were performed by 10 experienced gastroenterologists who were then informed that periodic confidential monitoring and feedback of withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and satisfaction scores would be started. We then prospectively collected data on another 541 screening colonoscopies. We compared pre- and postmonitoring outcome measures.
Results: Overall, after monitoring had begun, there was an increase in mean withdrawal times (from 6.57 to 8.07 minutes; P < .0001), and polyp detection rates (from 33.1% to 38.1%; P = .04, significance removed by Bonferroni correction). Nine of the 10 endoscopists increased their withdrawal times significantly. There was a small, nonsignificant increase in the neoplasia detection rate (from 19.6% to 22.7%; P = .17), but no significant change in mean satisfaction scores. Across endoscopists, there was a moderate correlation (r = 0.63; P = .04, significance removed by Bonferroni correction) between withdrawal times and polyp detection rates, but not between withdrawal times and satisfaction scores.
Limitations: No randomization, possible response bias, confounding of intervention effects, and sample size limitations.
Conclusions: Monitoring and feedback are associated with increases in mean withdrawal times and polyp detection rates, but not patient satisfaction scores. Neoplasia detection rates showed a statistically nonsignificant trend toward an increase.
Copyright 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articlesSawhney MS, Cury MS, Neeman N, Ngo LH, Lewis JM, Chuttani R, Pleskow DK, Aronson MD. Sawhney MS, et al. Gastroenterology. 2008 Dec;135(6):1892-8. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.08.024. Epub 2008 Aug 27. Gastroenterology. 2008. PMID: 18835390
Madhoun MF, Tierney WM. Madhoun MF, et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jan;75(1):127-33. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.048. Epub 2011 Oct 1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012. PMID: 21963062
Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL. Barclay RL, et al. N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 14;355(24):2533-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055498. N Engl J Med. 2006. PMID: 17167136
Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Fletcher RH, Stillman JS, O'Brien MJ, Levin B, Smith RA, Lieberman DA, Burt RW, Levin TR, Bond JH, Brooks D, Byers T, Hyman N, Kirk L, Thorson A, Simmang C, Johnson D, Rex DK; US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer; American Cancer Society. Winawer SJ, et al. Gastroenterology. 2006 May;130(6):1872-85. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.012. Gastroenterology. 2006. PMID: 16697750 Review.
Cappell MS. Cappell MS. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2008 Mar;37(1):129-60, vii-viii. doi: 10.1016/j.gtc.2007.12.003. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2008. PMID: 18313544 Review.
Sharma RS, Rossos PG. Sharma RS, et al. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;2016:9423142. doi: 10.1155/2016/9423142. Epub 2016 Apr 26. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016. PMID: 27446877 Free PMC article. Review.
Kolber MR, Olivier N, Babenko O, Torrie R, Green L. Kolber MR, et al. Can Fam Physician. 2018 Dec;64(12):e553-e560. Can Fam Physician. 2018. PMID: 30541822 Free PMC article.
Nielsen AB, Nielsen OH, Hendel J. Nielsen AB, et al. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2017 Jun 1;4(1):e000142. doi: 10.1136/bmjgast-2017-000142. eCollection 2017. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2017. PMID: 28761691 Free PMC article.
Chung SH, Park SJ, Hong JS, Hwang JY, Lee SA, Kim KR, Lee HS, Hong SP, Cheon JH, Kim TI, Kim WH. Chung SH, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jul 14;19(26):4177-84. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i26.4177. World J Gastroenterol. 2013. PMID: 23864781 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Singh P, Ballou S, Katon J, Takazawa E, Rangan V, Mukherjee R, Iturrino J, Nee J, Lembo A. Singh P, et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Dec;18(13):2945-2951.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.01.045. Epub 2020 Feb 11. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020. PMID: 32057975 Free PMC article.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3