Colonoscopy demand and capacity in New Hampshire

Would you recommend screening colonoscopy for the very elderly?

Life expectancy in Korea has increased, and the number of screening colonoscopies in the elderly has also dramatically increased. The net benefit of colonoscopy in the very elderly (≥80 years of age as defined by the World Health Organization) may be reduced because of the competing risk of mortality due to other diseases. Therefore, the decision to perform screening colonoscopy may be more complex in this age group. As the potential increase in life expectancy due to screening colonoscopy is significantly reduced in the very elderly, this procedure should be limited to those among the very elderly who have substantial life expectancies. Furthermore, considering the common major complications associated with colonoscopy, poor bowel preparation, and the possibility of incomplete colonoscopies in the very elderly, the performance of screening colonoscopy in the very elderly may not be an ideal recommendation. In terms of providing the greatest benefit to the most number of people, patients with the highest potential gain in terms of life expectancy, relative to the diagnostic yield, should be targeted for colonoscopy screening. This review addresses the unique considerations regarding screening colonoscopy in the very elderly and the individualized approach, which involves the weighing of the risks and benefits for each individual with consideration of their overall health status.

Strategies and resources to address colorectal cancer screening rates and disparities in the United States and globally

Colorectal cancer is a significant cause of mortality in the United States and globally. In the United States, increased access to screening and effective treatment has contributed to a reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality for the general population, though significant disparities persist. Worldwide, the disparities are even more pronounced, with vastly different colorectal cancer mortality rates and trends among nations. Newly organized colorectal cancer screening programs in economically developed countries with a high burden of colorectal cancer may provide pathways to reduce these disparities over time. This article provides an overview of colorectal cancer incidence, mortality, screening, and disparities in the United States and other world populations. Promising strategies and resources are identified to address colorectal cancer screening rates and disparities in the United States and worldwide.

Rural-urban differences in colorectal cancer screening capacity in Arizona

Colorectal cancer can be prevented via screening by the detection and removal of colorectal adenomas. Few data exist on screening capacity by rural/urban areas. Therefore, the aims of this work were to evaluate current colorectal cancer endoscopy screening capacity and to estimate potential volume for rural and urban regions in Arizona. Gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons practicing in Arizona completed a survey (n = 105) that assessed current colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy screening and estimated future capacity. Resources needed to increase capacity were identified, and differences between rural and urban regions were examined. Responders were more likely to practice in an urban region (89.5%). Physicians reported performing 8,717 endoscopic procedures weekly (8,312 in urban and 405 in rural regions) and the vast majority were colonoscopies (91% in urban and 97% in rural regions). Urban physicians estimated being able to increase their capacity by 35.7% (95% confidence interval 34.7-35.7) whereas rural physicians estimated an increase of 53.1% (95% confidence interval 48.1-58.0). The most commonly cited resource needed to increase capacity was a greater number of physicians in urban regions (52.1%); while the top response in rural areas was appropriate compensation (54.6%). Lastly, 27.3% of rural physicians noted they did not need additional resources to increase their capacity. In conclusion, Arizona has the ability to expand colorectal cancer screening endoscopic capacity; this potential increase was more pronounced in rural as compared to urban regions.

Association of local capacity for endoscopy with individual use of colorectal cancer screening and stage at diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Limited capacity for endoscopy in areas in which African Americans and Hispanics live may be a reason for persistent disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and stage at diagnosis.

METHODS

The authors linked data from the National Health Interview Survey on the use of CRC screening and data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare on CRC stage with measures of county capacity for colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy (endoscopy) derived from Medicare claims.

RESULTS

Hispanics lived in counties with less capacity for endoscopy than African Americans or whites (for National Health Interview Survey, an average of 1224, 1569, and 1628 procedures per 100,000 individuals aged > or = 50 years, respectively). Individual use of CRC screening increased modestly as county capacity increased. For example, as the number of endoscopies per 100,000 residents increased by 750, the odds of being screened increased by 4%. Disparities in screening were mitigated or diminished by adjustment for area endoscopy capacity, racial/ethnic composition, and socioeconomic status. Similarly, among individuals with CRC, those who lived in counties with less endoscopy capacity were marginally less likely to be diagnosed at an early stage. Adjustment for area characteristics diminished disparities in stage for Hispanics compared with whites but not African Americans.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the use of CRC screening may require interventions to improve capacity for endoscopy in some areas. The characteristics of the area where an individual resides may in part mediate disparities in CRC screening use for both African Americans and Hispanics, and disparities in cancer stage for Hispanics.

Improving the quality of colorectal cancer screening: assessment of familial risk

BACKGROUND

Accuracy of familial risk assessment by endoscopists in determining colonoscopic screening and surveillance intervals is unknown.

AIMS

To investigate follow-up recommended by endoscopists for individuals at average or increased familial risk, following colonoscopies that were normal or yielded hyperplastic polyps only.

METHODS

Colonoscopy registry data was analyzed on 5,982 patients who had colonoscopy between 2004 and 2006. Patient information was linked with colonoscopy procedure information and pathology results. Patients with a personal or family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) or polyps, inflammatory bowel disease, or who had diagnostic, incomplete or suboptimally prepped examinations were excluded. The final analysis, which included 2,414 patients, investigated concordance of risk assessment between patient and endoscopist, and resulting endoscopist follow-up recommendations.

RESULTS

Following normal colonoscopy, 76% of average risk individuals were told to follow-up in 10 years, but if a hyperplastic polyp was found, less than 10 years was suggested for 76%. Many patients reporting a known familial cancer syndrome or a very strong family history did not have that history indicated on the endoscopist's procedure form, and recommended follow-up intervals were beyond guideline recommendations for 60.4% of the very high-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopists may sometimes be unaware of the presence of familial risk factors, even for individuals at very high familial risk. Greater consistency and accuracy in familial risk assessments could significantly increase the efficacy of screening in preventing colorectal cancer.

The views of gastroenterologists about the role of nurse endoscopists, especially in colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Nurse endoscopists may provide a solution for the insufficient endoscopic capacity in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

AIM

To determine the views of gastroenterologists about the potential role of nurse endoscopists in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

A postal questionnaire was sent to all registered gastroenterologists (n = 301) and gastroenterology residents (n = 79) in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty five of 380 (62%) gastroenterologists and residents completed the questionnaire. Overall, 48% were positive towards introduction of nurse endoscopists, whereas 18% were neutral and 34% negative. Respondents expected no major differences in endoscopic quality between physicians and nurse endoscopists. Nevertheless, 69% expected that patient experiences would be better met by physicians. Multivariate analysis showed that actual experience with nurse endoscopists and beliefs that nurse endoscopists are able to provide adequate endoscopic quality and good patient experiences, were independent predictors for a positive attitude towards introduction of nurse endoscopists [OR 6.6 (2.3-18.4), OR 1.9 (1.2-3.5) and OR 2.1 (1.2-2.9), respectively]. Respectively 89% and 66% of the respondents considered sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy for CRC screening as appropriate procedures to be performed by nurse endoscopists. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopies were considered less appropriate.

CONCLUSION

A majority of gastroenterologists have a positive attitude towards introduction of nurse endoscopists, especially for CRC screening endoscopies.

Capacity for colorectal cancer screening by colonoscopy, Montana, 2008

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is largely preventable by screening, but screening participation is low in Montana. Colonoscopy is often considered the most accurate screening test and has the potential to prevent colon cancer by pre-emptive removal of polyps. However, colonoscopy may not be equally available to all residents of rural states. The Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS) has assigned high priority to colorectal cancer prevention, but before beginning a campaign to increase screening, DPHHS conducted a survey to determine existing colonoscopy screening capacity.

METHODS

An eight-question survey was sent by DPHHS to all hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers that perform colonoscopy in Montana, assessing their current and projected capacity to perform screening colonoscopies. Data were collected from March to May 2008, and analysis was performed in June 2008.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 43 of 44 hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers performing colonoscopies in Montana. The number of screening colonoscopies performed was estimated to be 19,444 per year. Unused colonoscopy screening capacity was estimated to be 23,096 procedures per year. Although similar total capacity existed in urban and rural areas, more unused capacity existed in rural areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Montana has statewide capacity to meet moderately increased demand for screening colonoscopy but would be able to meet only 17% of demand in 2009 if all eligible adults chose colonoscopy as their primary form of screening. It is feasible to develop campaigns to increase screening colonoscopy participation now, but a systematic combination of colonoscopy and other screening modalities may be better able to meet Montana's long-term needs.

Trends in colorectal cancer testing among Medicare subpopulations

BACKGROUND

In 1998, Medicare initiated universal coverage for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening via fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy. In mid-2001, universal coverage was advanced to screening colonoscopy. This study sought to determine whether trends in CRC testing differed among racial/ethnic, age, or gender subgroups of the Medicare population.

METHODS

In 2006, claims from 1995 to 2003 were analyzed for annual 5% random samples of fee-for-service Medicare enrollees living in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) regions to calculate the annual, age-standardized percentages of subjects who received FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy. Logistic regression then modeled trends in annual test use within racial/ethnic, age, and gender subgroups across three Medicare coverage periods (precoverage [1995-1997]; limited coverage [1998-mid-2001]; and full coverage [mid-2001-2003]).

RESULTS

The annual use of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy declined from 1995 to 2003 in all racial/ethnic groups, but the relative decline in sigmoidoscopy use was greater among whites compared to nonwhites. In contrast, colonoscopy use increased substantially in all racial/ethnic groups. However, relative to the precoverage period among whites, the full-coverage period was associated with significantly greater colonoscopy use among whites (OR=2.14; 95% CI=2.09, 2.19) than blacks (OR=1.86; 95% CI=1.75, 1.96); Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR=1.73; 95% CI=1.62, 1.86); or Hispanics (OR=1.65; 95% CI=1.49, 1.81). The use of colonoscopy during the full-coverage period was also differentially greater among enrollees aged <80 years. CRC testing trends were similar among male and female enrollees.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy is supplanting sigmoidoscopy as a CRC test among Medicare enrollees, while FOBT use is in decline. The transition from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy has occurred more quickly among white than nonwhite Medicare enrollees.

Utilization rates, complications and costs of percutaneous liver biopsy: a population-based study including 4275 biopsies

BACKGROUND

Liver biopsy is an important tool in the management of patients with liver disease. Because biopsy practices may be changing, we studied patterns of use in a large Canadian Health Region. We aimed to describe trends in biopsy utilization and the incidence and costs of complications from a population-based perspective.

METHODS

Administrative databases were used to identify percutaneous liver biopsies performed between 1994 and 2002. Significant complications were identified by reviewing medical records of patients hospitalized within 7 days of a biopsy and those with a diagnostic code indicative of a procedural complication. Analyses of biopsy rates employed Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Between 1994 and 2002, 3627 patients had 4275 liver biopsies (median 1 per patient; range 1-12). Radiologists performed the majority (90%), particularly during the latter years (1994 vs. 2002: 73 vs. 98%; P<0.0001). The overall annual biopsy rate was 54.8 per 100 000 population with a 41% (95% CI 23-61%) increase between 1994 and 2002. Annual increases were greatest in males and patients 30-59 years. Thirty-two patients (0.75%) had significant biopsy-related complications (1994-1997 vs. 1998-2002: 1.28 vs. 0.44%; P=0.003). Pain requiring admission (0.51%) and bleeding (0.35%) were most common. Six patients (0.14%) died; all had malignancies. The median direct cost of a hospitalization for complications was $4579 (range $1164-29 641).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver biopsy rates are increasing likely owing to the changing epidemiology and management of common liver diseases. The similarity of the complication rate in our population-based study with estimates from specialized centres supports the safety of this important procedure.

Timing of repeat colonoscopy: disparity between guidelines and endoscopists' recommendation

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy possesses the highest sensitivity of available screening tests for colorectal cancer and polyps, but it also carries risks. Appropriate intervals for repeating colonoscopy are important to ensure that the benefits of screening and surveillance are not offset by harms. The study objective was to examine whether endoscopists' recommendations for repeat colonoscopy, as communicated to primary care clinicians after the procedure, adhered to published guidelines.

METHODS

Analysts abstracted medical records at ten primary care practices in Virginia and Maryland in 2006. The records of a random sample of men and women (300 per practice) aged 50 to 70 years were reviewed. The sample included patients who had a colonoscopy and a written report from an endoscopist, and who lacked designated risk factors. The main outcome was concordance between endoscopists' recommendations and published guidelines regarding repeat colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Of 3000 charts reviewed, 1282 (42.7%) included records of a colonoscopy and 1021 (34%) included an endoscopist's report. In 64.9% of communications, the endoscopist specified when retesting should occur. Recommendations were consistent with contemporaneous guidelines in only 39.2% of cases and with current guidelines in 36.7% of cases. The adjusted mean number of years in which repeat colonoscopy was recommended was 7.8 years following normal colonoscopy and 5.8 years and 4.4 years, respectively, when hyperplastic polyps or 1-2 small adenomatous polyps were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopists often recommended repeat colonoscopy at shorter intervals than are advised either by current guidelines or by guidelines in effect at the time of the procedure. Endoscopists' communications to primary care clinicians often lacked contextual information that might explain these discrepancies. Unless appropriate caveats apply, adhering to endoscopists' recommendations may incur unnecessary harms and costs.