Cargando…

Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and polyp detection rate (PDR) are both indicators for colonoscopy quality. Improving ADR or PDR is critical for reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Although several studies have focused on identifying the factors that may influen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liang, Min, Zhang, Xinyan, Xu, Chunhong, Cao, Junli, Zhang, Zongwang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9326494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911411
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.872231
_version_ 1784757299242336256
author Liang, Min
Zhang, Xinyan
Xu, Chunhong
Cao, Junli
Zhang, Zongwang
author_facet Liang, Min
Zhang, Xinyan
Xu, Chunhong
Cao, Junli
Zhang, Zongwang
author_sort Liang, Min
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and polyp detection rate (PDR) are both indicators for colonoscopy quality. Improving ADR or PDR is critical for reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Although several studies have focused on identifying the factors that may influence ADR or PDR, the evidence remains limited and inconclusive. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the effect of anesthesia assistance (AA) on ADR or PDR in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening and identify risk factors affecting ADR or PDR. METHODS: We reviewed electronic medical records of patients who underwent colonoscopy screening between May 2019 and August 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received AA: patients in Group A underwent colonoscopy screening with AA, whereas patients in Group O underwent colonoscopy screening without AA. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to account for differences in baseline characteristics. After, ADR and PDR were compared between the two groups. Binary logistic regression was employed to identify risk factors that affected ADR or PDR. RESULTS: Of 9432 patients who underwent colonoscopy examination during the study period, 7170 were included in the final analyses (Group A = 5756 and Group O = 1414). After PSM, 736 patients remained in each group for analyses. There was no significant difference between groups A and O (P > 0.05) in ADR or PDR. Binary logistic regression indicated that the endoscopic device version (Olympus HQ290), equipment image-based technique and number of images were independent risk factors that affected ADR, and the age (50–59 years and 60–69 years), gender (male), high-risk status, endoscopist seniority (senior endoscopist), equipment image-based technique and number of images were all independent risk factors that affected PDR. CONCLUSIONS: We discovered that AA does not affect ADR or PDR. Despite improved patient satisfaction, using AA is unnecessary for improving colonoscopy quality. Endoscopists should consider all these factors as much as possible when performing colonoscopy screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9326494
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93264942022-07-28 Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators Liang, Min Zhang, Xinyan Xu, Chunhong Cao, Junli Zhang, Zongwang Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and polyp detection rate (PDR) are both indicators for colonoscopy quality. Improving ADR or PDR is critical for reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Although several studies have focused on identifying the factors that may influence ADR or PDR, the evidence remains limited and inconclusive. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the effect of anesthesia assistance (AA) on ADR or PDR in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening and identify risk factors affecting ADR or PDR. METHODS: We reviewed electronic medical records of patients who underwent colonoscopy screening between May 2019 and August 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received AA: patients in Group A underwent colonoscopy screening with AA, whereas patients in Group O underwent colonoscopy screening without AA. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to account for differences in baseline characteristics. After, ADR and PDR were compared between the two groups. Binary logistic regression was employed to identify risk factors that affected ADR or PDR. RESULTS: Of 9432 patients who underwent colonoscopy examination during the study period, 7170 were included in the final analyses (Group A = 5756 and Group O = 1414). After PSM, 736 patients remained in each group for analyses. There was no significant difference between groups A and O (P > 0.05) in ADR or PDR. Binary logistic regression indicated that the endoscopic device version (Olympus HQ290), equipment image-based technique and number of images were independent risk factors that affected ADR, and the age (50–59 years and 60–69 years), gender (male), high-risk status, endoscopist seniority (senior endoscopist), equipment image-based technique and number of images were all independent risk factors that affected PDR. CONCLUSIONS: We discovered that AA does not affect ADR or PDR. Despite improved patient satisfaction, using AA is unnecessary for improving colonoscopy quality. Endoscopists should consider all these factors as much as possible when performing colonoscopy screening. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9326494/ /pubmed/35911411 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.872231 Text en Copyright © 2022 Liang, Zhang, Xu, Cao and Zhang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
Liang, Min
Zhang, Xinyan
Xu, Chunhong
Cao, Junli
Zhang, Zongwang
Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title_full Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title_fullStr Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title_full_unstemmed Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title_short Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators
title_sort anesthesia assistance in colonoscopy: impact on quality indicators
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9326494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911411
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.872231
work_keys_str_mv AT liangmin anesthesiaassistanceincolonoscopyimpactonqualityindicators
AT zhangxinyan anesthesiaassistanceincolonoscopyimpactonqualityindicators
AT xuchunhong anesthesiaassistanceincolonoscopyimpactonqualityindicators
AT caojunli anesthesiaassistanceincolonoscopyimpactonqualityindicators
AT zhangzongwang anesthesiaassistanceincolonoscopyimpactonqualityindicators