David Beaton MD , Linda Sharp PhD , Nigel Trudgill MD , Mo Thoufeeq MD , Brian D. Nicholson DPhi , Peter Rogers , Allan John Morris MD , Matthew Rutter MD
{"title":"British Society of Gastroenterology national evaluation of colonoscopy quality: findings from the National Endoscopy Database","authors":"David Beaton MD , Linda Sharp PhD , Nigel Trudgill MD , Mo Thoufeeq MD , Brian D. Nicholson DPhi , Peter Rogers , Allan John Morris MD , Matthew Rutter MD","doi":"10.1016/j.gie.2024.12.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><div>The aim of this study was to analyze national colonoscopy quality with the use of automatically uploaded data from a national database, including exploring performance variation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data on all colonoscopies performed in the United Kingdom from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020, and recorded in the National Endoscopy Database were analyzed. Unadjusted key performance indicators were calculated and proportions of endoscopists achieving national standards were determined. Regression models tested associations between case mix (patient age, sex, indication) and colonoscopy quality. Endoscopist factors (specialty, annual procedure numbers, withdrawal times) were added to case mix–adjusted models, with results presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 592,764 colonoscopies were analyzed. Rates of cecal intubation (93.5%; 95% CI, 93.4-93.6), polyp detection (37.3%; 95% CI, 37.2-37.4), and moderate to severe patient discomfort (4.8%; 95% CI, 4.7-4.8) had all improved since the 2011 national audit (<em>P</em> < .01 for all). A total of 63.9% of endoscopists met all minimum standards for cecal intubation, polyp detection, and discomfort, but only 46.4% did so among those performing fewer than 100 colonoscopies annually. Overall, surgeons recorded lower cecal intubation and polyp detection rates than gastroenterologists (<em>P</em> < .01); however, those performing more than 100 annual colonoscopies achieved key performance indicators similarly to gastroenterologists. Endoscopists with longer withdrawal times were almost twice as likely to identify polyps (aOR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.2) and detected more large polyps (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.0).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>United Kingdom colonoscopy quality has improved, yet almost 40% of endoscopists still fell short of minimum standards. Variation in quality was strongly associated with endoscopist procedure volumes. Mandating minimum annual procedures and emphasizing longer withdrawal times could improve overall quality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12542,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","volume":"102 1","pages":"Pages 117-128.e6"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016510725000082","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and Aims
The aim of this study was to analyze national colonoscopy quality with the use of automatically uploaded data from a national database, including exploring performance variation.
Methods
Data on all colonoscopies performed in the United Kingdom from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020, and recorded in the National Endoscopy Database were analyzed. Unadjusted key performance indicators were calculated and proportions of endoscopists achieving national standards were determined. Regression models tested associations between case mix (patient age, sex, indication) and colonoscopy quality. Endoscopist factors (specialty, annual procedure numbers, withdrawal times) were added to case mix–adjusted models, with results presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results
A total of 592,764 colonoscopies were analyzed. Rates of cecal intubation (93.5%; 95% CI, 93.4-93.6), polyp detection (37.3%; 95% CI, 37.2-37.4), and moderate to severe patient discomfort (4.8%; 95% CI, 4.7-4.8) had all improved since the 2011 national audit (P < .01 for all). A total of 63.9% of endoscopists met all minimum standards for cecal intubation, polyp detection, and discomfort, but only 46.4% did so among those performing fewer than 100 colonoscopies annually. Overall, surgeons recorded lower cecal intubation and polyp detection rates than gastroenterologists (P < .01); however, those performing more than 100 annual colonoscopies achieved key performance indicators similarly to gastroenterologists. Endoscopists with longer withdrawal times were almost twice as likely to identify polyps (aOR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.2) and detected more large polyps (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.0).
Conclusions
United Kingdom colonoscopy quality has improved, yet almost 40% of endoscopists still fell short of minimum standards. Variation in quality was strongly associated with endoscopist procedure volumes. Mandating minimum annual procedures and emphasizing longer withdrawal times could improve overall quality.
背景与目的:利用国家数据库自动上传的数据分析全国结肠镜检查质量,包括探索性能变化。方法:分析2019年3月1日至2020年2月29日在英国进行的所有结肠镜检查数据,并记录在国家内窥镜数据库中。计算未调整的关键绩效指标,确定达到国家标准的内镜医师比例。回归模型检验了病例组合(患者年龄、性别、适应症)与结肠镜检查质量之间的关系。将内镜医师因素(专业、年度手术次数、停药次数)添加到病例混合调整模型中,结果显示为调整优势比(aOR),置信区间为95%。结果:共分析结肠镜检查592,764例。自2011年国家审计以来,直肠插管率(93.5%,95% CI 93.4-93.6)、息肉检出率(37.3%,95% CI 37.2-37.4)和中度/重度患者不适(4.8%,95% CI 4.7-4.8)均有所改善(结论:英国结肠镜检查质量有所提高,但近40%的内镜医师仍未达到最低标准。内镜检查质量的变化与内镜检查量密切相关;规定最低限度的年度程序,并强调更长的退出时间,可以提高整体质量。
期刊介绍:
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy is a journal publishing original, peer-reviewed articles on endoscopic procedures for studying, diagnosing, and treating digestive diseases. It covers outcomes research, prospective studies, and controlled trials of new endoscopic instruments and treatment methods. The online features include full-text articles, video and audio clips, and MEDLINE links. The journal serves as an international forum for the latest developments in the specialty, offering challenging reports from authorities worldwide. It also publishes abstracts of significant articles from other clinical publications, accompanied by expert commentaries.