Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative

Barriers and Challenges to Implementing a Quality Improvement Program: Political and Administrative Challenges

Quality improvement (QI) programs have rapidly grown in health care over recent years. Despite increasing evidence of successful QI initiatives resulting in improved outcomes, the adoption and implementation of QI programs remain a challenge worldwide. This paper briefly describes political and administrative barriers that impede the implementation of QI programs, including political and ideological factors, socioeconomic and educational barriers, and barriers related to data collection, privacy, and security. Key political and administrative barriers identified include resource limitations due to inadequate public funding, stringent laws, and change resistance. Potential solutions include support and commitment from regional and national authorities, consultation of all involved parties during QI program development, and financial incentives. The barrier of limited resources is starker among low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with high-income countries (HICs) due to the absence of adequate infrastructure, personnel equipped with QI-oriented skills, and analytical technology. Solutions that have facilitated QI programs in some LMICs include outreach and collaboration with other health centers and established QI programs in HICs. The lack of QI-specific training and education in medical curricula challenges QI implementation but can be mitigated through the provision of QI promotion webinars, QI-specific project opportunities, and formalized QI training modules. Finally, barriers related to data collection, privacy, and security include laws hindering the availability of quality data, inefficient data collection and processes, and outdated clinical information systems. Access to high-quality data, organized record-keeping, and alignment of data collection processes will help alleviate these barriers to QI program implementation. The multidimensional nature of these barriers means that proposed solutions will require coordination from multiple stakeholders, government support, and leaders across multiple fields.

Frequency of colorectal surveillance colonoscopies for adenomatous polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess evidence on the frequency of polyp surveillance colonoscopies performed earlier than the recommended follow-up intervals in clinical practice guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed based on electronic searches in PubMed and Embase. Research articles, letters to the editors, and review articles, published before April 2022, were included. Studies that focused on the intervals of polyp surveillance in adult populations were selected. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Exposure (ROBINS-E) was used to assess the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was performed with Forest plots to illustrate the results.

RESULTS

In total, 16 studies, comprising 11 172 patients from Australia, Europe, and North America, were included for analysis. The quality of the studies was moderate. Overall, 38% (95% CI: 30-47%) of colonoscopies were undertaken earlier than their respective national clinical guidelines. In risk-stratified surveillance, 10 studies contained data relating to low-risk polyp surveillance intervals and 30% (95% CI: 29-31%) of colonoscopies were performed earlier than recommended. Eight studies contained data relating to intermediate-risk polyp surveillance and 15% (95% CI: 14-17%) of colonoscopies were performed earlier than recommended. One study showed that 6% (95% CI: 4-10%) of colonoscopies performed for high-risk polyp surveillance were performed earlier than recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of polyp surveillance was performed earlier than the guidelines suggested. This provides evidence of the potential overuse of healthcare resources and the opportunity to improve hospital efficiency.

Colonoscopy, imaging, and carcinoembryonic antigen: Comparison of guideline adherence to surveillance strategies in patients who underwent resection of colorectal cancer - A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Almost one-third of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) experience recurrence after resection. Adherence to surveillance guidelines largely dictates efficacy in early detection of recurrence. We sought to assess and compare adherence to postoperative surveillance guidelines for colonoscopy, imaging, and Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA).

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and CINAHL were systematically searched. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed and pooled adherence to each surveillance strategy was assessed for CEA, imaging, and colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Overall 14 studies (55,895 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Adherence to colonoscopy guidelines was the highest (70%, 95%CI 67-73), followed by imaging (63%, 95%CI 47-80), and CEA (54%; 95%CI 42-66). Among 7 (50%) studies that examined adherence to the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, compliance with colonoscopy was the highest (73%; 95% CI 70-76), followed by imaging (58%; 95% CI 37-78), and CEA (45%; 95%CI 37-52). Of note, guideline adherence to CEA testing was much lower than colonoscopy among patients with colon (OR 0.21; 95%CI 0.20-0.22) and rectal cancer (OR 0.25; 95%CI 0.23-0.28) (both p < 0.05). This was also noted when compared with imaging recommendations among older patients (OR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.42-0.93) and patients with stage II, (OR = 0.80; 95%CI 0.76-0.84) and stage III disease (OR = 0.88; 95%CI 0.82-0.94) (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

While guideline adherence to postoperative surveillance with colonoscopy was high, adherence to CEA testing and imaging surveillance strategies was markedly lower following CRC resection. Future studies should investigate avenues to improve compliance with surveillance guidelines among health care providers and patients to optimize postoperative follow-up for CRC.

Real-world compliance with the 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer polypectomy surveillance guidelines: an observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Overuse of screening colonoscopy increases cost and procedural adverse events, but inadequate surveillance can miss the development of colorectal cancer. We measured compliance with the 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) polypectomy surveillance guidelines in clinical records and a survey.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study comparing surveillance intervals for first-time average-risk colonoscopies with the 2020 USMSTF guidelines. Cases were analyzed from 3 intervals (March 2021 to May 2021, November 2021 to January 2022, and April 2022 to May 2022), collectively termed the postguideline period, and a baseline period from November 2019 to January 2020. Real-world compliance rates were compared with results of a survey conducted between November 2020 and February 2021.

RESULTS

Overall compliance was 48.9% among 532 colonoscopies, ranging from 8.3% for low-risk adenomas (LRAs), 88.3% for high-risk adenomas, 63.1% for sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), and 88.6% for hyperplastic polyps. Compliance for LRA increased from the baseline period (.8% vs 8.3%, P = .003), and 95.3% of nonadherent LRA cases followed the 2012 USMSTF guidelines. Compliance for LRAs was 18.6% among respondents who provided a compliant surveillance interval for LRAs in the survey. Noncompliance was associated with finishing training >10 years ago (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.7) and performing over 800 colonoscopies annually (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of the 2020 USMSTF surveillance guidelines remains low at 2 years. Further research into outcomes for patients with LRAs and SSPs may increase guideline adoption.

A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Clinician-Directed Interventions to Improve Compliance to Post-Polypectomy Surveillance Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines recommend periodic colonoscopy surveillance following colorectal adenoma excision. Inappropriate use of post-polypectomy surveillance (PPS) is common and lead to improper resource utilization. The aim of this review was to identify structured interventions which can affect PPS practises and to evaluate the effectiveness of these various interventions in improving clinician adherence to PPS guidelines.

METHODS

A computerized search was performed to identify relevant studies between 1997 and November 2020. Two investigators identified eligible studies and extracted data independently. The quality of the included studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa risk of assessment scoring system.

RESULTS

The search identified 5,602 citations. Forty-one articles were retrieved for full-text analysis and 7 studies met the inclusion criteria. Compliance to PPS guidelines was higher following interventions which included medical education, specialist nurse coordinators facilitation, continuous quality improvement, and clinical decision support systems.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that medical education, specialist nurse coordinators, continuous quality improvement, and clinical decision support systems are effective in improving clinicians' compliance to PPS guidelines, and are associated with reduction in over- and underutilization of colonoscopy surveillance resources.

BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial

OBJECTIVES

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality marker at lower GI endoscopy. Higher ADRs are associated with lower postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates. The English flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening programme (BowelScope), offers a one-off FS to individuals aged 55 years. However, variation in ADR exists. Large studies have demonstrated improved ADR using Endocuff Vision (EV) within colonoscopy screening, but there are no studies within FS. We sought to test the effect of EV on ADR in a national FS screening population.

DESIGN

BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using ENdocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving 16 English BowelScope screening centres. Individuals were randomised to Endocuff Vision-assisted BowelScope (EAB) or Standard BowelScope (SB). ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP), polyp characteristics and location, participant experience, procedural time and adverse events were measured. Comparison of ADR within the trial with national BowelScope ADR was also undertaken.

RESULTS

3222 participants were randomised (53% male) to receive EAB (n=1610) or SB (n=1612). Baseline demographics were comparable between arms. ADR in the EAB arm was 13.3% and that in the SB arm was 12.2% (p=0.353). No statistically significant differences were found in PDR, MAP, polyp characteristics or location, participant experience, complications or procedural characteristics. ADR in the SB control arm was 3.1% higher than the national ADR.

CONCLUSION

EV did not improve BowelScope ADR when compared with SB. ADR in both arms was higher than the national ADR. Where detection rates are already high, EV is unable to improve detection further.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03072472, ISRCTN30005319 and CPMS ID 33224.

What Is Organized Screening and What Is Its Value?

Most screening in the United States occurs in an opportunistic fashion, although organized screening occurs in some integrated health care systems. Organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening consists of an explicit screening policy, defined target population, implementation team, health care team for clinical care delivery, quality assurance infrastructure, and method for identifying cancer outcomes. Implementation of an organized screening program offers opportunities to systematically assess the success of the program and develop interventions to address identified gaps in an effort to optimize CRC outcomes. There is evidence of that organized screening is associated with improvements in screening participation and CRC mortality.

A novel summary report of colonoscopy: timeline visualization providing meaningful colonoscopy video information

PURPOSE

The colonoscopy adenoma detection rate depends largely on physician experience and skill, and overlooked colorectal adenomas could develop into cancer. This study assessed a system that detects polyps and summarizes meaningful information from colonoscopy videos.

METHODS

One hundred thirteen consecutive patients had colonoscopy videos prospectively recorded at the Seoul National University Hospital. Informative video frames were extracted using a MATLAB support vector machine (SVM) model and classified as bleeding, polypectomy, tool, residue, thin wrinkle, folded wrinkle, or common. Thin wrinkle, folded wrinkle, and common frames were reanalyzed using SVM for polyp detection. The SVM model was applied hierarchically for effective classification and optimization of the SVM.

RESULTS

The mean classification accuracy according to type was over 93%; sensitivity was over 87%. The mean sensitivity for polyp detection was 82.1%, and the positive predicted value (PPV) was 39.3%. Polyps detected using the system were larger (6.3 ± 6.4 vs. 4.9 ± 2.5 mm; P = 0.003) with a more pedunculated morphology (Yamada type III, 10.2 vs. 0%; P < 0.001; Yamada type IV, 2.8 vs. 0%; P < 0.001) than polyps missed by the system. There were no statistically significant differences in polyp distribution or histology between the groups. Informative frames and suspected polyps were presented on a timeline. This summary was evaluated using the system usability scale questionnaire; 89.3% of participants expressed positive opinions.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and verified a system to extract meaningful information from colonoscopy videos. Although further improvement and validation of the system is needed, the proposed system is useful for physicians and patients.

Patient comfort scores do not affect endoscopist behavior during colonoscopy, while trainee involvement has negative effects on patient comfort

INTRODUCTION

Patient comfort is an important part of endoscopy and reflects procedure quality and endoscopist technique. Using the validated, Nurse Assisted Patient Comfort Score (NAPCOMS), this study aimed to determine whether the introduction of NAPCOMS would affect sedation use by endoscopists.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted over 3 phases. Phase One and Two consisted of 8 weeks of endoscopist blinded and aware data collection, respectively. Data in Phase Three was collected over a 5-month period and scores fed back to individual endoscopists on a monthly basis.

RESULTS

NAPCOMS consists of 3 domains - pain, sedation, and global tolerability. Comparison of Phase One and Two, showed no significant differences in sedative use or NAPCOMS. Phase Three data showed a decline in fentanyl use between individual months ( P  = 0.035), but no change in overall NAPCOMS. Procedures involving trainees were found to use more midazolam ( P  = 0.01) and fentanyl ( P  = 0.01), have worse NAPCOMS scores, and resulted in longer procedure duration ( P  < 0.001). Data comparing gastroenterologists and general surgeons showed increased fentanyl use ( P  = 0.037), decreased midazolam use ( P  = 0.001), and more position changes ( P  = 0.002) among gastroenterologists.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a patient comfort scoring system resulted in a decrease in fentanyl use, although with minimal clinical significance. Additional studies are required to determine the role of patient comfort scores in quality control in endoscopy. Procedures completed with trainees used more sedation, were longer, and had worse NAPCOMS scores, the implications of which, for teaching hospitals and training programs, will need to be further considered.

Organization of surveillance in GI practice

BACKGROUND

Several reports documented an inefficient utilisation of available resources, as well as a suboptimal compliance with surveillance recommendations. Although, evidence suggests that organisational issues can influence the quality of care delivered, surveillance protocols are usually based on non-organized approaches.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search (publication date: 01/2000-06/2016) on PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for guidelines, or consensus statements, for surveys of practice, reporting information about patients, or providers attitudes and behaviours, for intervention studies to enhance compliance with guidelines. Related articles were also scrutinised. Based on the clinical relevance and burden on endoscopy services this review was focused on surveillance for Barrett's oesophagus, IBD and post-polypectomy surveillance of colonic adenomas.

RESULTS

Existing guidelines are generally recognising structure and process requirements influencing delivery of surveillance interventions, while less attention had been devoted to transitions and interfaces in the care process. Available evidence from practice surveys is suggesting the need to design organizational strategies aimed to enable patients to attend and providers to deliver timely and appropriate care. Well designed studies assessing the effectiveness of specific interventions in this setting are however lacking. Indirect evidence from screening settings would suggest that the implementation of automated standardized recall systems, utilisation of clinical registries, removing financial barriers, could improve appropriateness of use and compliance with recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of sound evidence regarding utility and methodology of surveillance can contribute to explain the observed variability in providers and patients attitudes and in compliance with the recommended surveillance.

Appropriateness of endoscopic surveillance recommendations in organised colorectal cancer screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test

OBJECTIVES

To assess the appropriateness of recommendations for endoscopic surveillance in organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test (FIT).

DESIGN

74 Italian CRC screening programmes provided aggregated data on the recommendations given after FIT-positive colonoscopies in 2011 and 2013. Index colonoscopies were divided into negative/no adenoma and low- risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk adenomas. Postcolonoscopy recommendations included a return to screening (FIT after 2 years or 5 years), an endoscopic surveillance after 6 months or after 1 year, 3 years or 5 years, surgery or other. We assessed the deviation from the postcolonoscopy recommendations of the European Guidelines in 2011 and 2013 and the correlation between overuse of endoscopic surveillance in 2011 and the process indicators associated with the endoscopic workload in 2013.

RESULTS

49 704 postcolonoscopy recommendations were analysed. High-risk, intermediate-risk and low-risk adenomas, and no adenomas were reported in 5.9%, 19.3%, 15.3% and 51.5% of the cases, respectively. Endoscopic surveillance was inappropriately recommended in 67.4% and 7%, respectively, of cases with low-risk and no adenoma. Overall, 37% of all endoscopic surveillance recommendations were inappropriate (6696/17 860). Overuse of endoscopic surveillance was positively correlated with the extension of invitations (correlation coefficient (cc) 0.29; p value 0.03) and with compliance with post-FIT+ colonoscopy (cc 0.25; p value 0.05), while it was negatively correlated with total colonoscopy waiting times longer than 60 days (cc -0.26; p value 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In organised screening programmes, a high rate of inappropriate recommendations for patients with low risk or no adenomas occurs, affecting the demand for endoscopic surveillance by a third.

Pre- and post-procedural quality indicators for colonoscopy: A nationwide survey

BACKGROUND

The provision of high-quality colonoscopy can be assessed by evaluating technical aspects of the procedure and, at individual center level, by comparing structural indicators and institutional policies for managing peri-procedural issues with guideline recommendations.

AIM

To assess the colonoscopy quality (CQ) in Italy at center level.

METHODS

Gastroenterologists participating in a nationwide colonoscopy education initiative provided information on structural indicators of their centers and on institutional policies by answering 10 multiple-choice clinical scenarios. Practice variation across centers and compliance with guidelines were analyzed.

RESULTS

Data from 282 Italian centers were evaluated. Overall, a significant proportion of centers did not meet CQ standards as concerns endoscopy facilities and equipments (e.g., dedicated recovery room, dirty-to-clean path, reporting software). CQ assurance programs were implemented in only 25% of centers. Concerning peri-procedural issues, main discrepancies with guidelines were recorded in the underuse of split-dose preparation (routinely adopted by 18% of centers), the routine request of coagulation tests prior to colonoscopy (30%), the routine interruption of aspirin for polypectomy (18%), and the adoption of 3-year surveillance for low-risk adenoma (49%).

CONCLUSIONS

Present survey shows a significant variation in the CQ of endoscopy centers in Italy on many items of colonoscopy practice that should be targeted for future interventions.

Yield of adenomas and colorectal cancers within 5 years of a negative colonoscopy: are the guidelines guiding?

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal cancers outside the recommended guidelines presents a considerable burden to resource management in many public hospitals. The aim of this study is to evaluate the frequency, indications and outcomes for repeat colonoscopy performed within 5 years of a negative colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all colonoscopies at Nambour Hospital in 2008 was performed to identify those with a negative colonoscopy. The charts of patients undergoing repeat colonoscopy at the same institution within 5 years of a negative colonoscopy were examined further, and data obtained regarding indications and outcomes of subsequent colonoscopies.

RESULTS

A total of 616 colonoscopies were identified, 427 (69.3%) were negative for adenoma and carcinoma. Of these patients, 74 (17.3%) underwent a repeat colonoscopy at Nambour Hospital within 5 years. Eighteen out of 74 (24.3%) were outside guideline recommendation. Overall, one patient (1.4%) had cancer and 11 patients (14.9%) had polyps detected at repeat colonoscopy. Most of the polyps detected had low-risk features and were detected in the fourth and fifth years of the study period.

CONCLUSION

The yield of a second colonoscopy within 5 years of a good-quality negative colonoscopy is low but not zero. In the absence of new concerning symptoms or other risk factors, patients can be reassured and guidelines adhered to.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) programs may result in quality of care and outcome improvement. However, the implementation of such programs has proven to be very challenging. This mixed methods systematic review identifies barriers and facilitators pertaining to the implementation of CQI programs in colonoscopy services and how they relate to endoscopists, nurses, managers, and patients.

METHODS

We developed a search strategy adapted to 15 databases. Studies had to report on the implementation of a CQI intervention and identified barriers or facilitators relating to any of the four groups of actors directly concerned by the provision of colonoscopies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed and findings were extracted, categorized, and synthesized using a generic extraction grid customized through an iterative process.

RESULTS

We extracted 99 findings from the 15 selected publications. Although involving all actors is the most cited factor, the literature mainly focuses on the facilitators and barriers associated with the endoscopists' perspective. The most reported facilitators to CQI implementation are perception of feasibility, adoption of a formative approach, training and education, confidentiality, and assessing a limited number of quality indicators. Receptive attitudes, a sense of ownership and perceptions of positive impacts also facilitate the implementation. Finally, an organizational environment conducive to quality improvement has to be inclusive of all user groups, explicitly supportive, and provide appropriate resources.

CONCLUSION

Our findings corroborate the current models of adoption of innovations. However, a significant knowledge gap remains with respect to barriers and facilitators pertaining to nurses, patients, and managers.

Adherence to surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomas: a large, community-based study

OBJECTIVE

To determine adherence to recommended surveillance intervals in clinical practice.

DESIGN

2997 successive patients with a first adenoma diagnosis (57% male, mean age 59 years) from 10 hospitals, who underwent colonoscopy between 1998 and 2002, were identified via Pathologisch Anatomisch Landelijk Geautomatiseerd Archief: Dutch Pathology Registry. Their medical records were reviewed until 1 December 2008. Time to and findings at first surveillance colonoscopy were assessed. A surveillance colonoscopy occurring within ± 3 months of a 1-year recommended interval and ± 6 months of a recommended interval of 2 years or longer was considered appropriate. The analysis was stratified by period per change in guideline (before 2002: 2-3 years for patients with 1 adenoma, annually otherwise; in 2002: 6 years for 1-2 adenomas, 3 years otherwise). We also assessed differences in adenoma and colorectal cancer recurrence rates by surveillance timing.

RESULTS

Surveillance was inappropriate in 76% and 89% of patients diagnosed before 2002 and in 2002, respectively. Patients eligible under the pre-2002 guideline mainly received surveillance too late or were absent (57% of cases). For patients eligible under the 2002 guideline surveillance occurred mainly too early (48%). The rate of advanced neoplasia at surveillance was higher in patients with delayed surveillance compared with those with too early or appropriate timed surveillance (8% vs 4-5%, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

There is much room for improving surveillance practice. Less than 25% of patients with adenoma receive appropriate surveillance. Such practice seriously hampers the effectiveness and efficiency of surveillance, as too early surveillance poses a considerable burden on available resources while delayed surveillance is associated with an increased rate of advanced adenoma and especially colorectal cancer.

Improving Quality Metric Adherence to Minimally Invasive Breast Biopsy among Surgeons Within a Multihospital Health Care System

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive breast biopsy (MIBB) is the procedure of choice for diagnosing breast lesions indeterminate for malignancy. Multihospital health care systems face challenges achieving systemwide adherence to standardized guidelines among surgeons with varying practice patterns. This study tested whether providing individual feedback about surgeons' use of MIBB to diagnose breast malignancies improved quality metric adherence across a large health care organization.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective matched-pairs study to test differences (or lack of agreement) between periods before and after intervention. All analytical cases of primary breast cancer diagnosed during 2011 (period 1) and from July 2012 to June 2013 (period 2) across a multihospital health care system were reviewed for initial diagnosis by MIBB or open surgical biopsy. Open surgical biopsy was considered appropriate care only if MIBB could not be performed for reasons listed in the American Society of Breast Surgeons' quality measure for preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer. Individual and systemwide results of adherence to the MIBB metric during period 1 were sent to each surgeon in June 2012 and were later compared with period 2 results using McNemar's test of marginal homogeneity for matched binary responses.

RESULTS

Forty-six surgeons were evaluated on use of MIBB to diagnose breast cancer. In period 1, metric adherence for 100% of cases was achieved by 37 surgeons, for a systemwide 100% compliance rate of 80.4%. After notification of individual performance, 44 of 46 surgeons used MIBB solely or otherwise appropriate care to diagnose breast cancer, which improved systemwide compliance to 95.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing individual and systemwide performance results to surgeons can increase self-awareness of practice patterns when diagnosing breast cancer, leading to standardized best-practice care across a large health care organization.

Predictors of Poor Adherence of US Gastroenterologists with Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer published guidelines for colonoscopy screening and surveillance in 2008 and affirmed them in 2012. Characteristics associated with guideline adherence among US gastroenterologists have not been assessed.

AIM

Assess awareness and adherence of US gastroenterologists with national guidelines for colonoscopy screening and surveillance and predictors of adherence to guidelines.

METHODS

A Web-based survey was administered to gastroenterologists in various practice settings across the USA.

RESULTS

A total of 306 gastroenterologists completed the survey; 86 % reported awareness of the guidelines. Low-volume colonoscopists (<20/month) were less likely to be aware of the guidelines (OR 0.26, p = 0.03) compared to high-volume colonoscopists (>100/month). Those completing training before 1990 were less likely to report following guidelines (OR 0.37, p = 0.01). Adherence with guidelines was then assessed via clinical scenarios. Compared to physicians finishing training in 1991-2010, less adherence was seen in those finishing before 1990 (OR 0.75, p < 0.001) or currently in training (OR 0.72, p = 0.004). Compared to the Western USA, less adherence was seen in the Midwest (OR 0.69, p = 0.001), Northeast (OR 0.63, p < 0.001), and South (OR 0.59, p < 0.001). Lower adherence was seen among non-academic physicians (OR 0.72, p = 0.001) and low-volume colonoscopists (OR 0.52, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is poor adherence with colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines among US gastroenterologists. Poor adherence was associated with being in training or finishing training before 1990, practicing in the South, non-academic settings, and low colonoscopy volume. These findings can target interventions for quality improvement in colorectal cancer screening and surveillance.

Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change

A vast range of disorders--from indolent to fast-growing lesions--are labelled as cancer. Therefore, we believe that several changes should be made to the approach to cancer screening and care, such as use of new terminology for indolent and precancerous disorders. We propose the term indolent lesion of epithelial origin, or IDLE, for those lesions (currently labelled as cancers) and their precursors that are unlikely to cause harm if they are left untreated. Furthermore, precursors of cancer or high-risk disorders should not have the term cancer in them. The rationale for this change in approach is that indolent lesions with low malignant potential are common, and screening brings indolent lesions and their precursors to clinical attention, which leads to overdiagnosis and, if unrecognised, possible overtreatment. To minimise that potential, new strategies should be adopted to better define and manage IDLEs. Screening guidelines should be revised to lower the chance of detection of minimal-risk IDLEs and inconsequential cancers with the same energy traditionally used to increase the sensitivity of screening tests. Changing the terminology for some of the lesions currently referred to as cancer will allow physicians to shift medicolegal notions and perceived risk to reflect the evolving understanding of biology, be more judicious about when a biopsy should be done, and organise studies and registries that offer observation or less invasive approaches for indolent disease. Emphasis on avoidance of harm while assuring benefit will improve screening and treatment of patients and will be equally effective in the prevention of death from cancer.

The appropriateness of surveillance colonoscopy intervals after polypectomy

BACKGROUND

Adherence to surveillance colonoscopy guidelines is important to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) and unnecessary workload.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how well Canadian gastroenterologists adhere to colonoscopy surveillance guidelines after adenoma removal or treatment for CRC.

METHODS

Patients with a history of adenomas or CRC who had surveillance performed between October 2008 and October 2010 were retrospectively included. Time intervals between index colonoscopy and surveillance were compared with the 2008 guideline recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association and regarded as appropriate when the surveillance interval was within six months of the recommended time interval.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients were included (52% men; mean age 58 years). Among patients with a normal index colonoscopy (n=110), 42% received surveillance on time, 38% too early (median difference = 1.2 years too early) and 20% too late (median difference = 1.0 year too late). Among patients with nonadvanced adenomas at index (n=96), 25% underwent surveillance on time, 61% too early (median difference = 1.85) and 14% too late (median difference = 1.1). Among patients with advanced neoplasia at index (n=59), 29% underwent surveillance on time, 34% too early (median difference = 1.86) and 37% later than recommended (median difference = 1.61). No significant difference in adenoma detection rates was observed when too early surveillance versus appropriate surveillance (34% versus 33%; P=0.92) and too late surveillance versus appropriate surveillance (21% versus 33%; P=0.11) were compared.

CONCLUSION

Only a minority of surveillance colonoscopies were performed according to guideline recommendations. Deviation from the guidelines did not improve the adenoma detection rate. Interventions aimed at improving adherence to surveillance guidelines are needed.

Overutilization of post-polypectomy surveillance colonoscopy in clinical practice: a prospective, multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Although the adherence to post-polipectomy recommendations is advocated as a quality indicator of colonoscopy programmes, prospective data on actual use of surveillance are lacking.

AIM

To evaluate the appropriateness of post-polypectomy surveillance colonoscopy on a community-wide basis and to identify factors associated with it.

METHODS

Data on consecutive post-polypectomy surveillance examinations performed over a 4-week period in 29 Italian endoscopy units were collected. The time interval between index and surveillance colonoscopy was calculated and compared to guidelines recommendations. Determinants of surveillance timing appropriateness were assessed by logistic step-wise regression.

RESULTS

Of 7081 consecutive outpatients, 1218 (17.2%) were referred for post-polypectomy surveillance and 902 were included into the analysis. Surveillance colonoscopy was prescribed correctly in 330 subjects (36.6%) and earlier than recommended by guidelines in 490 (54.3%). Low-risk subjects had an anticipated surveillance colonoscopy more frequently than global cohort (67.4% vs. 54.3%, p<0.001). At multivariate analysis, determinants of correct surveillance timing were high-volume workload centres (OR 1.92; 1.41-2.63 95%CI), centres providing written recommendation on surveillance interval (OR 1.70; 1.18-2.58 95%CI) and surveillance examinations performed within the national screening programme (OR 2.62; 1.92-3.59 95%CI).

CONCLUSIONS

In community practice, post-polipectomy surveillance colonoscopy is often performed earlier than recommended, especially in low-risk subjects. Interventions to improve adherence to guidelines and to reduce unnecessary examinations are needed.

Understanding the variation in treatment intensity among patients with early stage bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Given the uncertainty surrounding the optimal management for early stage bladder cancer, physicians vary in how they approach the disease. The authors of this report linked cancer registry data with medical claims to identify the sources of variation and opportunities for improving the value of cancer care.

METHODS

By using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database (1992-2005), patients with early stage bladder cancer were abstracted (n=18,276). The primary outcome was the intensity of initial treatment that patients received, as measured by all Medicare payments for bladder cancer incurred in the 2 years after diagnosis. Multilevel models were fitted to partition the variation in treatment intensity attributable to patient versus provider factors, and the potential savings to Medicare from reducing the physician contribution were estimated.

RESULTS

Provider factors accounted for 9.2% of the variation in treatment intensity. Increasing provider treatment intensity did not correlate with improved cancer-specific survival (P=.07), but it was associated with the subsequent receipt of major interventions, including radical cystectomy (P<.001). If provider-level variation was reduced and clinical practice was aligned with that of physicians who performed in the 25th percentile of treatment intensity, then total payments made for the average patient could be lowered by 18.6%, saving Medicare $18.7 million annually.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results indicated that a substantial amount of the variation in initial treatment intensity for early stage bladder cancer is driven by the physician. Furthermore, a more intensive practice style was not associated with improved cancer-specific survival or the avoidance of major interventions. Therefore, interventions aimed at reducing between-provider differences may improve the value of cancer care.

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.

Importance of postpolypectomy surveillance and postpolypectomy compliance to follow-up screening--review of literature

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 150,000 people are diagnosed with colorectal cancer each year and 56,000 may die from it annually in the United States. Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the USA and yet, when diagnosed at an early stage, it is one of the most preventable cancers. According to the US Preventive Services Task Force, initial screening for colorectal cancer is recommended in people above 50 years of age with average risk and earlier in people with a strong family history and other risk factors. Adenomatous polyps are considered as precursors of colorectal cancer. Removal of polyps and postpolypectomy surveillance reduces the overall mortality from colorectal cancer.

DISCUSSION

According to updated guidelines in 2006, a 3-year-follow-up colonoscopy is recommended in patients with adenomatous polyps>or=1 cm. An important factor in the surveillance and prevention of colorectal cancer in postpolypectomy patients is compliance with follow-up colonoscopy. In the present article, we provide an overview of the importance of postpolypectomy surveillance and summarize the compliance data for postpolypectomy surveillance. Compliance to postpolypectomy surveillance varies from one study to another and it should be expected that the compliance with follow-up would be low outside of clinical trials. Some measures that can improve patient compliance include patient education regarding a need of follow-up screening, reminder letters, and alerts in patient's charts.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, effective surveillance screening with good patient compliance in postpolypectomy patients will contribute significantly in reducing colon cancer morbidity and mortality.

Primer: applying the new postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines in clinical practice

Colonoscopy is being increasingly used for colorectal cancer screening, which has resulted in a growing cohort of patients who have polyps that require postpolypectomy surveillance. Risk stratification enables postpolypectomy surveillance to be tailored to individual patient needs, and this is one of the fundamental points emphasized by the unified US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society (USMSTF-ACS) guidelines. Most patients do not require intensive surveillance; those patients who have one or two small (<1 cm) adenomas can safely undergo repeat colonoscopy after 5-10 years. Consensus guidelines that merge the recommendations of all societies are more user-friendly than individual guidelines, decrease confusion, and eliminate conflicting recommendations that are a barrier to guideline uptake. Nonetheless, studies have shown that specialists and nonspecialists overutilize colonoscopy for postpolypectomy surveillance, which places a large burden on already strained resources. Barriers to guideline implementation include factors involving the patient, physician, and health-care system. Physician education and widespread implementation of continuous quality improvement programs are required to bridge the gap between the guidelines and their clinical application.

Recent developments in the role of endoscopic ultrasonography in diseases of the colon and rectum

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endoscopic ultrasound has evolved as a useful technique for imaging and intervention in a variety of gastrointestinal and extraintestinal diseases including diseases of the colon and rectum. This paper will review recent developments in endoscopic ultrasound for colorectal diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have shown significant clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound in rectal cancer staging. Iliac lymph node evaluation by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration may further expand the role of endoscopic ultrasound in rectal cancer. Three-dimensional endoscopic ultrasound may help decrease some of the errors of staging with two-dimensional endoscopic ultrasound and may further improve staging accuracy. Recent studies have confirmed continued problems with re-staging rectal cancer after chemoradiation. Endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle aspiration can be helpful in detecting local recurrence of rectal cancer and has been shown to be useful in evaluation of subepithelial masses of the colon and rectum and evaluation of rectosigmoid endometriosis.

SUMMARY

Endoscopic ultrasound continues to be useful for a variety of conditions of the colon and rectum with recent studies confirming its clinical impact as well as expanding its role into newer indications. Assessment for residual cancer after chemoradiation is still problematic and hopefully technological developments in ultrasound in the future may help in improving the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in this situation.