Cargando…
Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown colonoscopy withdrawal time (WT) to be a reliable surrogate indicator for polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colonoscopy. Our aim was to assess the impact of feedback and monitoring of WT on PDR in routine colonoscopies with long-te...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5508965/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2017-000142 |
_version_ | 1783249948514451456 |
---|---|
author | Nielsen, Amalie Bach Nielsen, Ole Haagen Hendel, Jakob |
author_facet | Nielsen, Amalie Bach Nielsen, Ole Haagen Hendel, Jakob |
author_sort | Nielsen, Amalie Bach |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown colonoscopy withdrawal time (WT) to be a reliable surrogate indicator for polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colonoscopy. Our aim was to assess the impact of feedback and monitoring of WT on PDR in routine colonoscopies with long-term follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 307 colonoscopies were performed in three separate clinical scenarios. First, PDR and WT were recorded without the staff being aware of the specific objective of the study. Before the second scenario, the staff was given interventional information and feedback on WTs and PDRs from the first scenario and was encouraged to aim for a minimum WT of 8 min. Retention of knowledge gained was reassessed in the third scenario 1 year later. RESULTS: The PDR in the first two scenarios differed significantly (p<0.01), with a more than 90% increase in PDR after intervention from 22% to 42% (95% CI 1.44 to 4.95), although the mean WT did not change (6.8 vs 7.2 min; p>0.05). The increase in PDR between the first and second scenarios was retained in the third follow-up scenario 1 year later where the WT of both polyp-positive and polyp-negative colonoscopies was found to be longer. CONCLUSIONS: PDR almost doubled from the first to the second scenario of a real-life colonoscopy setting, indicating that awareness of WT is crucial. The knowledge gained from this intervention in routine practice was even retained after a year. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5508965 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55089652017-07-31 Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates Nielsen, Amalie Bach Nielsen, Ole Haagen Hendel, Jakob BMJ Open Gastroenterol Endoscopy BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown colonoscopy withdrawal time (WT) to be a reliable surrogate indicator for polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colonoscopy. Our aim was to assess the impact of feedback and monitoring of WT on PDR in routine colonoscopies with long-term follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 307 colonoscopies were performed in three separate clinical scenarios. First, PDR and WT were recorded without the staff being aware of the specific objective of the study. Before the second scenario, the staff was given interventional information and feedback on WTs and PDRs from the first scenario and was encouraged to aim for a minimum WT of 8 min. Retention of knowledge gained was reassessed in the third scenario 1 year later. RESULTS: The PDR in the first two scenarios differed significantly (p<0.01), with a more than 90% increase in PDR after intervention from 22% to 42% (95% CI 1.44 to 4.95), although the mean WT did not change (6.8 vs 7.2 min; p>0.05). The increase in PDR between the first and second scenarios was retained in the third follow-up scenario 1 year later where the WT of both polyp-positive and polyp-negative colonoscopies was found to be longer. CONCLUSIONS: PDR almost doubled from the first to the second scenario of a real-life colonoscopy setting, indicating that awareness of WT is crucial. The knowledge gained from this intervention in routine practice was even retained after a year. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5508965/ /pubmed/28761691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2017-000142 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Endoscopy Nielsen, Amalie Bach Nielsen, Ole Haagen Hendel, Jakob Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title | Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title_full | Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title_fullStr | Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title_short | Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
title_sort | impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates |
topic | Endoscopy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5508965/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2017-000142 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nielsenamaliebach impactoffeedbackandmonitoringoncolonoscopywithdrawaltimesandpolypdetectionrates AT nielsenolehaagen impactoffeedbackandmonitoringoncolonoscopywithdrawaltimesandpolypdetectionrates AT hendeljakob impactoffeedbackandmonitoringoncolonoscopywithdrawaltimesandpolypdetectionrates |