Individualized feedback on colonoscopy skills improves group colonoscopy quality in providers with lower adenoma detection rates

被引:2
|
作者
Keswani, Rajesh N. [1 ]
Wood, Mariah [1 ]
Benson, Mark [2 ]
Gawron, Andrew J. [3 ,4 ]
Kahi, Charles [5 ]
Kaltenbach, Tonya [6 ]
Yadlapati, Rena [7 ]
Gregory, Dyanna [1 ]
Duloy, Anna [8 ]
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Madison, WI USA
[3] Univ Utah, Gastroenterol, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[4] Salt Lake City VA Med Ctr, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[5] Indiana Univ, Med Ctr, Gastroenterol, Indianapolis, IN USA
[6] Univ Calif San Francisco, Gastroenterol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[7] Univ Calif San Diego, Gastroenterol, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[8] Univ Colorado, Gastroenterol, Denver, CO USA
关键词
WITHDRAWAL TECHNIQUE; INDICATORS; RISK;
D O I
10.1055/a-1529-5574
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and study aims Colonoscopy inspection quality (CIQ) assesses skills (fold examination, cleaning, and luminal distension) during inspection for polyps and correlates with adenoma detection rate (ADR) and serrated detection rate (SDR). We aimed to determine whether providing individualized CIQ feedback with instructional videos improves quality metrics performance. Methods We prospectively studied 16 colonoscopists who already received semiannual benchmarked reports of quality metrics (ADR, SDR, and withdrawal time [WT]). We randomly selected seven colonoscopies/colonoscopist for evaluation. Six gastroenterologists graded CIQ using an established scale. We created instructional videos demonstrating optimal and poor inspection techniques. Colonoscopists received the instructional videos and benchmarked CIQ performance. We compared ADR, SDR, and WT in the 12 months preceding ("baseline") and following CIQ feedback. Colonoscopists were stratified by baseline ADR into lower (<= 34 %) and higher-performing (> 34 %) groups. Results Baseline ADR was 38.5 % (range 26.8 %-53.8 %) and SDR was 11.2 % (2.8 %-24.3 %). The proportion of colonoscopies performed by lower-performing colonoscopists was unchanged from baseline to post-CIQ feedback. All colonoscopists reviewed their CIQ report cards. Post-feedback, ADR (40.1 % vs 38.5 %, P = 0.1) and SDR (12.2 % vs. 11.2 %, P = 0.1) did not significantly improve; WT significantly increased (11.4 vs 12.4 min, P < 0.01). Among the eight lower-performing colonoscopists, group ADR (31.1 % vs 34.3 %, P = 0.02) and SDR (7.2 % vs 9.1 %, P = 0.02) significantly increased post-feedback. In higher-performing colonoscopists, ADR and SDR did not change. Conclusions CIQ feedback modestly improves ADR and SDR among colonoscopists with lower baseline ADR but has no effect on higher-performing colonoscopists. Individualized feedback on colonoscopy skills could be used to improve polyp detection by lower-performing colonoscopists.
引用
收藏
页码:E232 / E237
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Involvement of a GI Fellow in Colonoscopy Improves Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR)
    Kiwan, Wissam
    Patel, Suhag
    Judd, Stephanie
    Nas, Hala
    Goyal, Sachin
    Antaki, Fadi
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2017, 112 : S115 - S115
  • [42] Next generation of virtual chromoendoscopy improves adenoma detection during colonoscopy
    Kiesslich, Ralf
    ENDOSCOPY, 2023, 55 (12) : 1081 - 1082
  • [43] Adenoma detection rate: is it the master key for the colonoscopy quality indicator?
    Kim, Su Young
    Kim, Hyun-Soo
    TRANSLATIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2018, 3
  • [44] Adenoma detection rate: the perfect colonoscopy quality measure or is there more?
    Liem, Brian
    Gupta, Neil
    TRANSLATIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2018, 3
  • [45] Split-dose preparation for colonoscopy increased adenoma detection rates
    Almario, Christopher V.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2016, 164 (08) : JC40 - JC40
  • [46] Fellow Involvement May Increase Adenoma Detection Rates During Colonoscopy
    Rogart, Jason N.
    Siddiqui, Uzma D.
    Jamidar, Priya A.
    Aslanian, Harry R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2008, 103 (11): : 2841 - 2846
  • [47] Does Trainee Participation During Colonoscopy Affect Adenoma Detection Rates?
    Eckardt, Alexander J.
    Swales, Colin
    Bhattacharya, Kanishka
    Wassef, Wahid Y.
    Leung, Katherine
    Levey, John M.
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2009, 52 (07) : 1337 - 1344
  • [48] Screening Indication for Colonoscopy May Not Be Necessary to Measure Adenoma Detection Rates
    Kaltenbach, Tonya
    Gawron, Andrew
    Gupta, Samir
    Shergill, Amandeep
    Dominitz, Jason A.
    Soetikno, Roy
    Whooley, Mary
    Kahi, Charles
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2016, 111 : S73 - S74
  • [49] Technological advances for improving adenoma detection rates: The changing face of colonoscopy
    Ishaq, Sauid
    Siau, Keith
    Harrison, Elizabeth
    Tontini, Gian Eugenio
    Hoffman, Arthur
    Gross, Seth
    Kiesslich, Ralf
    Neumann, Helmut
    DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE, 2017, 49 (07) : 721 - 727
  • [50] The Impact of Timed Colonoscopy Withdrawal on Adenoma Detection Rates at a Community Hospital
    Valencia, Diego
    Metwally, Mark
    Ciofoaia, Victor
    Gaudioso, Annie
    Hale, William
    Meighan, Dennis
    Gross, Seth
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2010, 105 : S568 - S568