Colonoscopy audit over 10 years-what can be learnt?

New Zealand Medical Journal

Volumn 126, Issue 1382, 2013, Pages 25-35

  Fraser, Alan G ^a   Gamble, Greg D ^a   Rose, Toby R ^b   Dunn, John P ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b MercyAscot and Mercy Radiology   (New Zealand)

^c Endoscopy Auckland   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CECUM; COLONOSCOPY; CONSCIOUSNESS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENDER; HUMAN; INTUBATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL PROCEDURES; POLYP; POLYPECTOMY; SCORING SYSTEM; WITHDRAWAL TIME;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; FEMALE; GASTROENTEROLOGY; GENERAL SURGERY; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; OPERATIVE TIME;

EID: 84884583451     PISSN: 00288446     EISSN: 11758716     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:873-885.
2. Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1795-1803.
3. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1296-1308.
4. Quality and safety indicators for endoscopy. Formulated by the BSG Endoscopy Committee in conjunction with the National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme, AUGIS and ACP. www.bsg.org.uk/attachments/170_bsg_grs_indic07.pdf
5. NHS Cancer Screening Programme. Quality assurance guidelines for colonoscopy, publication no. 6. http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/publications/nhsbcsp06.pdf
6. Aslinia F, Uradomo L, Steele A, Greenwald BD, Raufman JP. Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: An analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:721-731.
7. Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT, Donnelly MT, Williams JG, Swarbrick ET. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2013;62:249.
8. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2533-2541.
9. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:1091-1098.
10. Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH, et al. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;24: 965-971.
11. Sawhney MS, Cury MS, Neeman N, et al. Effect of institution-wide policy of colonoscopy withdrawal time >7 minutes on polyp detection. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1892-1898.
12. Overholt, BF, Brooks-Belli L, Grace M, et al. On behalf of the Benchmark Colonoscopy Group. Withdrawal times and associated factors in colonoscopy: A quality assurance multicenter assessment. J Clin Gastroenterol 2010;44: 80-86.
13. Lee TJ, Blanks RG, Rees CJ, et al. Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England. Endoscopy. 2013;1:20-6.
14. Ekkelenkamp, Shaw I, Valori, Dunckley P. Comfort scores in colonoscopy performance. Gut 2011;60:A44-A45.
15. Kim, WH, Cho YJ, Park JY, et al. Factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2000;52:600-605.
16. Park DI, Kim HJ, Park JH, et al. Factors affecting abdominal pain during colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 2007;39:872-6.
17. Ko HH, Zhang H, Telford JJ, et al. Factors influencing patient satisfaction when undergoing endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endoscopy 2009;69:883-91.
18. Hazeldine S, Fritschi L, Forbes G. Predicting patient tolerance of endoscopy with conscious sedation. Scand J Gastroenterol 2010;45:1248-54.
19. Williams JE, Le TD, MD, Faigel DO. Polypectomy rate as a quality measure for colonoscopy Gastrointest Endosc 2011;73:498-506.
20. Williams JE, Holub JL, Faigel DO. Polypectomy rate is a valid quality measure for colonoscopy: results from a national endoscopy database. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:576-82.
21. Coe SG, Crook JE, Diehl NN, Wallace MB. An endoscopic quality improvement program improves detection of colorectal adenomas. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:219-226.
22. Harewood GC, Petersen BT, Ott BJ. Prospective assessment of the impact of feedback on colonoscopy performance. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;24:313-8.
23. Lin OS, Kozarek RA, Arai A, et al. The effect of periodic monitoring and feedback on screening colonoscopy withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and patient satisfaction scores. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:1253-9.
24. Imperiali G, Minoli G, Meucci GM, et al. Effectiveness of a continuous quality improvement program on colonoscopy practice. Endoscopy 2007;39:314-8.
25. Kahi CJ, Ballard D, Shah AS, Mears R, Johnson CS. Impact of a quarterly report card on colonoscopy quality measures. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2013;77, 3 (published online)
26. Francis DL, Rodriguez-Correa DT, Buchner A, et al. Application of a conversion factor to estimate the adenoma detection rate from the polyp detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;73:493-7.
27. Rex DK. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:2866-2877.
28. Kahi CJ, Hewett DG, Norton DL, Eckert GJ, Rex DK. Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;1:42-6.
29. Liang J, Kalady MF, Appau K, Church J. Serrated polyp detection rate during screening colonoscopy. Colorectal Dis 2012:14:1323-7.