The Effect of Midyear Report Cards on Colonoscopy Quality Measures

INTRODUCTION: Since 2011, our institution has distributed annual reports, in June, to providers with personalized data regarding adenoma detection rate (ADR), colonoscope withdrawal time (CW), and cecal intubation (CI) rate, using standardized reporting systems. We examined the impact of distribution of individualized reports at the midpoint of each year on colonoscopy outcomes in the latter half of each year. METHODS: Providers with endoscopy privileges, performing ≥20 colonoscopies/year, at our center throughout a five-year period (2011-2015) were included. The three metrics recorded and reported were ADR, CW, and CI using standard benchmark rates. The mean values of each metric from January through June (1(st) half) and July through December (2(nd) half) were calculated. Curve estimation test was used to determine the significance of ADR in the respective time period. RESULTS: Fifteen providers were eligible for the study. Collective ADR in the 1(st) half of all years was 26.9% and in the second half of all years was 28.1% (p = 0.476). CW for all years was more than 9 minutes while CI was above 90% for all providers. There was no significant increase in the CI and CW during the 5-year study period. Overall, ADR increased from 26.43% (2011) to 33.47% (2015) (p = 0.137). When examining ADR during each of the 12 months following the June report cards, there was no month-to-month trend observed (p = 0.893). CONCLUSION: Endoscopists at our institutions met/exceeded the quality metrics in the first half of each year from the beginning of the study. Routine reporting may maintain, but not improve, outcomes. Long-term studies to determine if periodic feedback to endoscopists improves the quality of endoscopy as per national standards for detection of early colorectal cancers are required.