Cargando…

Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up

Background and study aims  Training future endoscopists is essential to meet rising demands for screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Studies have shown conflicting results regarding the influence of trainees on adenoma detection rates (ADR). It is unclear whether trainee participation during sc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eckardt, Alexander J., Kheder, Joan, Basil, Anjali, Silverstein, Taryn, Patel, Krunal, Mahmoud, Mohamed, Al-Azzawi, Yasir, Ellis, Daniel, Gillespie, William, Carrasquillo Vega, Yoel, Person, Sharina D., Levey, John M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2020
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33269304
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1244-1859
_version_ 1783611889692966912
author Eckardt, Alexander J.
Kheder, Joan
Basil, Anjali
Silverstein, Taryn
Patel, Krunal
Mahmoud, Mohamed
Al-Azzawi, Yasir
Ellis, Daniel
Gillespie, William
Carrasquillo Vega, Yoel
Person, Sharina D.
Levey, John M.
author_facet Eckardt, Alexander J.
Kheder, Joan
Basil, Anjali
Silverstein, Taryn
Patel, Krunal
Mahmoud, Mohamed
Al-Azzawi, Yasir
Ellis, Daniel
Gillespie, William
Carrasquillo Vega, Yoel
Person, Sharina D.
Levey, John M.
author_sort Eckardt, Alexander J.
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  Training future endoscopists is essential to meet rising demands for screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Studies have shown conflicting results regarding the influence of trainees on adenoma detection rates (ADR). It is unclear whether trainee participation during screening adversely affects ADR at subsequent surveillance and whether it alters surveillance recommendations. Patients and methods  A retrospective analysis of average-risk screening colonoscopies and surveillance exams over a subsequent 10-year period was performed. The initial inclusion criteria were met by 5208 screening and 2285 surveillance exams. Patients with poor preparation were excluded. The final analysis included 7106 procedures, including 4922 screening colonoscopies and 2184 surveillance exams. Data were collected from pathology and endoscopy electronic databases. The primary outcome was the ADR with and without trainee participation. Surveillance recommendations were analyzed as a secondary outcome. Results  Trainees participated in 1131 (23 %) screening and in 232 (11 %) surveillance exams. ADR did not significantly differ ( P  = 0.19) for screening exams with trainee participation (19.5 %) or those without (21.4 %). ADRs were higher at surveillance exams with (22.4 %) and without (27.5 %) trainee participation. ADR at surveillance was not adversely affected by trainee participation during the previous colonoscopy. Shorter surveillance intervals were given more frequently if trainees participated during the initial screening procedure ( P  = 0.0001). Conclusions  ADR did not significantly differ in screening or surveillance colonoscopies with or without trainee participation. ADR at surveillance was not adversely affected by trainee participation during the previous screening exam. However, trainee participation may result in shorter surveillance recommendations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7676994
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76769942020-12-01 Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up Eckardt, Alexander J. Kheder, Joan Basil, Anjali Silverstein, Taryn Patel, Krunal Mahmoud, Mohamed Al-Azzawi, Yasir Ellis, Daniel Gillespie, William Carrasquillo Vega, Yoel Person, Sharina D. Levey, John M. Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  Training future endoscopists is essential to meet rising demands for screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Studies have shown conflicting results regarding the influence of trainees on adenoma detection rates (ADR). It is unclear whether trainee participation during screening adversely affects ADR at subsequent surveillance and whether it alters surveillance recommendations. Patients and methods  A retrospective analysis of average-risk screening colonoscopies and surveillance exams over a subsequent 10-year period was performed. The initial inclusion criteria were met by 5208 screening and 2285 surveillance exams. Patients with poor preparation were excluded. The final analysis included 7106 procedures, including 4922 screening colonoscopies and 2184 surveillance exams. Data were collected from pathology and endoscopy electronic databases. The primary outcome was the ADR with and without trainee participation. Surveillance recommendations were analyzed as a secondary outcome. Results  Trainees participated in 1131 (23 %) screening and in 232 (11 %) surveillance exams. ADR did not significantly differ ( P  = 0.19) for screening exams with trainee participation (19.5 %) or those without (21.4 %). ADRs were higher at surveillance exams with (22.4 %) and without (27.5 %) trainee participation. ADR at surveillance was not adversely affected by trainee participation during the previous colonoscopy. Shorter surveillance intervals were given more frequently if trainees participated during the initial screening procedure ( P  = 0.0001). Conclusions  ADR did not significantly differ in screening or surveillance colonoscopies with or without trainee participation. ADR at surveillance was not adversely affected by trainee participation during the previous screening exam. However, trainee participation may result in shorter surveillance recommendations. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2020-12 2020-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7676994/ /pubmed/33269304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1244-1859 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Eckardt, Alexander J.
Kheder, Joan
Basil, Anjali
Silverstein, Taryn
Patel, Krunal
Mahmoud, Mohamed
Al-Azzawi, Yasir
Ellis, Daniel
Gillespie, William
Carrasquillo Vega, Yoel
Person, Sharina D.
Levey, John M.
Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title_full Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title_fullStr Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title_full_unstemmed Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title_short Trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect ADR at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
title_sort trainee participation during screening colonoscopy does not affect adr at subsequent surveillance, but may result in early follow-up
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33269304
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1244-1859
work_keys_str_mv AT eckardtalexanderj traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT khederjoan traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT basilanjali traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT silversteintaryn traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT patelkrunal traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT mahmoudmohamed traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT alazzawiyasir traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT ellisdaniel traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT gillespiewilliam traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT carrasquillovegayoel traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT personsharinad traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup
AT leveyjohnm traineeparticipationduringscreeningcolonoscopydoesnotaffectadratsubsequentsurveillancebutmayresultinearlyfollowup