Impact of fellowship training level on colonoscopy quality and efficiency metrics

You are not lab rats at teaching hospitals: A systematic review of resident and fellow participation leads to improved colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Participation in colonoscopies is an essential aspect of endoscopic training. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of fellow/trainee participation on colonoscopy outcomes.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). From database inception to July 2022, studies investigating fellow involvement and colonoscopy outcomes were searched across Cochrane library, PubMed, and other databases. The random-effects model was applied to generate more conservative estimates. Sensitive analysis was conducted to explore whether the result would depend on a particular study. Egger's test and Begg's test were used to estimate the potential for publication bias.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies including 30,062 participants were included. We found that fellow/trainee involvement enhanced the overall rates of adenoma detection and polyp detection (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.14-1.40, p < 0.001; OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.02-1.63, p = 0.020, respectively). The mean number of adenoma/polyps per colonoscopy was also higher with fellow/trainee participation (MD = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.08-0.17, p < 0.001; MD = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.02-0.28, p = 0.020, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In addition to its educational purpose, fellow or trainee involvement is associated with beneficial effects on colonoscopy outcomes.

Optimizing adenoma detection in screening-related colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Screening-related colonoscopy is a vital component of screening initiatives to both diagnose and prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), with prevention being reliant upon early and accurate detection of pre-malignant lesions. Several strategies, techniques, and interventions exist to optimize endoscopists' adenoma detection rates (ADR).

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review provides an overview of the importance of ADR and other colonoscopy quality indicators. It then summarizes the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of the following domains in terms of improving ADR: endoscopist factors, pre-procedural parameters, peri-procedural parameters, intra-procedural strategies and techniques, antispasmodics, distal attachment devices, enhanced colonoscopy technologies, enhanced optics, and artificial intelligence. These summaries are based on an electronic search of the databases Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane performed on December 12, 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the prevalence and associated morbidity and mortality of CRC, the quality of screening-related colonoscopy quality is appropriately prioritized by patients, endoscopists, units, and payers alike. Endoscopists performing colonoscopy should be up to date regarding available strategies, techniques, and interventions to optimize their performance.

Factors Associated with Difficulty Maintaining Insufflation of the Colon During Endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Insufflation of the colon allows for adequate visualization of the mucosal tissue and advancement of the endoscope during colonoscopy. Most colonoscopies are performed with sedation to mitigate discomfort and enhance the colonoscopy experience for both the patient and the endoscopist.

AIM

We aimed to evaluate factors associated with difficulty maintaining insufflation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of individuals undergoing colonoscopy at the Oklahoma City Veterans Affairs Medical Center was performed. Experiencing difficulty maintaining air insufflation during colonoscopy was assessed with a questionnaire completed by the performing endoscopist at the end of procedure. Information regarding procedure times, sedation used, demographics, comorbidities, surgical history, and medications used was extracted from the medical record. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with difficulty maintaining air insufflation. A P value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

996 Patients were included for the analysis. Difficulty with insufflation was reported in 240 (24%) colonoscopies; mean age of 63.8 ± 10.4 years old and 13% were female. Fellow trainees were involved in 669 (67%) colonoscopies. Older age (OR 1.02, P 0.03, CI [1.00-1.04]), diabetes (OR 1.5, 95% CI [1.03, 2.05]), fellow's involvement (OR 2.6. (95% CI [1.68, 4.09]), total procedure time (OR 1.02, 95% CI [1.00, 1.03]), mean number of adenomas (OR 1.05, 95% CI [1.00, 1.09]), and MAC use (OR 2.6, 95% CI [1.80, 3.85]) were independent predictors for difficulty in maintaining air insufflation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that endoscopists should be cognizant of colon insufflation issues in older, diabetic patients undergoing colonoscopies under deep sedation, particularly if prolonged procedure is anticipated or encountered.

Dye-based chromoendoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dye-based chromoendoscopy (DBC) could be effective in increasing the adenoma detection rate (ADR) in patients undergoing colonoscopy, but the technique is time-consuming and its uptake is limited. We aimed to assess the effect of DBC on ADR based on available randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Four databases were searched up to April 2022 for RCTs comparing DBC with conventional colonoscopy (CC) in terms of ADR, advanced ADR, and sessile serrated adenoma detection rate as well as the mean adenomas per patient and non-neoplastic lesions. Relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes were calculated using random-effect models. The I² test was used for quantifying heterogeneity. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane tool.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 RCTs (5334 patients) were included. Indication for colonoscopy was screening or surveillance (3 studies) and mixed (7 studies). Pooled ADR was higher in the DBC group versus the CC group (95% CI, 48.1% [41.4%-54.8%] vs 39.3% [33.5%-46.4%]; RR, 1.20 [1.11-1.29]), with low heterogeneity (I² = 29%). This effect was consistent for advanced ADR (RR, 1.21 [1.03-1.42]; I² = .0%), sessile serrated adenomas (6.1% vs 3.5%; RR, 1.68 [1.15-2.47]; I² = 9.8%), and mean adenomas per patient (MD, .24 [.17-.31]) overall and in the right-sided colon (MD, .28 [.14-.43]). A subgroup analysis considering only trials using high-definition white-light endoscopy reduced the heterogeneity while still showing a significant increase in adenoma detection with DBC: 51.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 47.1%-56.1%) and 59.1% (95% CI, 54.7-63.3%), RR = 1.14 (95% CI, 1.06-1.23), P = .0004, I² = .0%, P = .50.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of RCTs showed that DBC increases key quality parameters in colonoscopy, supporting its use in everyday clinical practice.

Association of Trainee Participation in Colonoscopy Procedures With Quality Metrics

IMPORTANCE

Trainees routinely participate in colonoscopy procedures, yet whether their involvement is positively or negatively associated with procedural quality is unknown because prior studies involved small number of trainees and/or supervisors, lacked generalizability, and/or failed to adjust for potential confounders.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between trainee participation and colonoscopy quality metrics.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter population-based cohort study was conducted at 21 academic and community hospitals between April 1, 2017, and October 31, 2018, among consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. Procedures performed by endoscopists who did not supervise trainees were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed from April 3, 2017, to October 31, 2018.

EXPOSURE

Participation by a trainee, defined as a resident or fellow enrolled in a gastroenterology or general surgery training program.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and perforation rate.

RESULTS

A total of 35 499 colonoscopies (18 989 women [53.5%]; mean [SD] patient age, 60.0 [14.1] years) were performed by 71 physicians (mean [SD] time in practice, 14.0 [9.3] years); 5941 colonoscopies (16.7%) involved trainees. There were no significant differences in the ADR (26.4% vs 27.3%; P = .19), CIR (96.7% vs 97.2%; P = .07), and perforation rate (0.05% vs 0.06%; P = .82) when trainees participated vs when they did not participate, whereas the the ssPDR (4.4% vs 5.2%; P = .009) and PDR (39.2% vs 42.0%; P < .001) were significantly lower when trainees participated vs when they did not. After adjustment for potential confounders, the ADR (risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; P = .30), PDR (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04; P = .47), and CIR (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10; P = .38) were not associated with trainee participation, although the ssPDR remained significantly lower (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that trainee involvement during colonoscopy was associated with reduced ssPDR but not other colonoscopy outcome measures. Extra care should be exercised when examining the right colon when trainees are involved.

Impact of Moderate versus Deep Sedation and Trainee Participation on Adenoma Detection Rate-Analysis of a Veteran Population

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is used as a quality indicator for screening and surveillance colonoscopy. The study aimed to determine if moderate versus deep sedation affects the outcomes of the ADR and other quality metrics in the veteran population.

METHODS

A retrospective review of colonoscopies performed at Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center over a one-year period was conducted. A total of 900 colonoscopy reports were reviewed. After exclusion criteria, a total of 229 index, average-risk screening colonoscopies were identified. Data were collected to determine the impact of moderate (benzodiazepine plus opioids) versus deep (propofol) sedation on the ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), and withdrawal time.

RESULTS

Among 229 screening colonoscopies, 103 (44.9%) used moderate sedation while 126 (55%) were done under deep sedation. The ADR and PDR were not significantly different between moderate versus deep sedation at 35.9% vs. 37.3% (p=0.82) and 58.2% vs. 48.4% (p=0.13), respectively. Similarly, there was no significant difference in withdrawal time between moderate and deep sedation (13.4 min vs. 14 min, p=0.56) during screening colonoscopies.

CONCLUSION

In veterans undergoing index, average-risk screening colonoscopies, the quality metrics of the ADR, PDR, and withdrawal time are not influenced by deep sedation compared with moderate sedation.

Adding efficiency to proficiency: a study of trainee polypectomy efficiency metrics

BACKGROUND

Although validated colonoscopy assessment tools exist, they do not measure efficiency. This study aimed to assess content validity of polypectomy efficiency (PE) and neoplastic polypectomy efficiency (NPE) as colonoscopy efficiency indices.

METHODS

Data from a randomized controlled trial evaluating polypectomy among gastroenterology trainees were utilized. PE and NPE were defined as number of polyps (or neoplastic polyps) removed/withdrawal time × 100. Content validity was assessed by determining the association between efficiency indices and polypectomy times.

RESULTS

20 trainees performed 601 colonoscopies. There was a strong association between PE/NPE and actual polypectomy times: as polypectomy time increased by 1 minute, the PE decreased by 0.48 (P = 0.001) and NPE decreased by 0.24 (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The study proposed and provided content validity for PE and NPE as colonoscopy efficiency indices.

Impact of fellow participation on colon adenoma detection rates: a multicenter randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are limited and conflicting data on the impact of fellow participation in improving the colon adenoma detection rate. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether fellow involvement might have a beneficial effect on adenoma detection rate.

METHODS

The trial was conducted at 4 tertiary hospitals between April and December 2019. Eight hundred twelve patients were randomized to undergo colonoscopy performed by a fellow under the supervision of a staff endoscopist or by an attending physician alone.

RESULTS

No significant differences in demographic or adenoma risk factors were detected between the 2 groups. The adenoma detection rate in the intervention group was 44.8% versus 37.1% in the control arm (P = .02). The mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy was significantly higher in the intervention group (0.65 ± 0.3 vs 0.53 ± 0.2 in the control arm, P < .001). The polyp detection rate was 69.7% in the intervention group and 62.5% in the control arm (P = .03), whereas rates of advanced and sessile/serrated adenoma detection were not different between the trial arms (P = .50 and .42, respectively). In the subgroup of more experienced fellows, the adenoma detection rate and polyp detection rate were 49.5% and 75.7%, respectively. No difference was observed between less-experienced fellows and attending physicians alone (P = .53 and 0.86, respectively). The level of bowel preparation and fellow involvement were significant predictors of increased adenoma detection rate in a multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multicenter trial represents the first prospective validation of the beneficial role of fellow involvement in colonoscopy procedures. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03908229.).

Anesthesia Assistance in Screening Colonoscopy and Adenoma Detection Rate Among Trainees

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The use of anesthesia assistance (AA) for screening colonoscopy has been increasing substantially over the past decade, raising concerns about procedure safety and cost without demonstrating a proven improvement in overall quality indicators such as adenoma detection rate (ADR). The effect of AA on ADR has not been extensively studied among trainees learning colonoscopy. We aimed to determine whether type of sedation used during screening colonoscopy affects trainee ADR.

METHODS

Using the electronic endoscopy databases of two hospitals in our medical center, we identified colonoscopies performed by 15 trainees from 2014 through 2018, including all screening examinations in which the cecum was reached. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with adenoma detection.

RESULTS

We identified 1420 unique patients who underwent screening colonoscopy by a trainee meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these, 459 (32.3%) were performed with AA. Overall trainee ADR was 39.6%, with ADR increasing from 35.0% in year one of training to 42.8% in year three (p = 0.047). ADR for cases with AA was 37.9%, while ADR for conscious sedation cases was 32.0% (p = 0.374). Despite this 5.9% absolute difference, the use of AA was not associated with finding an adenoma on multivariable analysis when controlling for patient age, sex, smoking status, body mass index, trainee year of training, mean withdrawal time, supervising attending ADR, and bowel preparation quality (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.67-1.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite providing the ability to more consistently sedate patients, the use of AA did not affect trainee ADR. These results on trainee ADR and sedation type suggest that the overall lack of association between AA use and ADR is applicable to the trainee setting.

Correlation between adenoma detection rate and polyp detection rate at endoscopy in a non-screening population

It is understood that colorectal adenomas progress to colonic adenocarcinoma. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) at endoscopy has been used as a key performance indicator at endoscopy and is inversely associated with diagnosis of interval colorectal cancer. As most endoscopy reporting systems do not routinely incorporate histological assessment, ADR reporting is a cumbersome task. Polyp Detection Rate (PDR) has therefore been adopted as a surrogate marker for ADR. A prospectively maintained database of colonoscopies performed between July 2015 and July 2017 was analysed. This was cross referenced with a histological database. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS, version 24. Inferential procedures employed included the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and Binomial logistic regression. Of 2964 procedures performed by 8 endoscopists, overall PDR was 27% and ADR was 19%. The PDR, ADR, adenoma to polyp detection rate quotient (APDRQ) and estimated ADR (PDR x APDRQ group average = 0.72) was calculated for each individual. There was a strong positive linear correlation between PDR and ADR,r(8) = 0.734, p = 0.038 and between PDR and estimated ADR, r(8) = 0.998, p < 0.001. Adenoma detection rate strongly correlated with estimated ADR, r(8) = 0.720, p = 0.044. With the exclusion of a moderate outlier, these correlations increased in both strength and significance. There was a stronger correlation between PDR and ADR,r(7) = 0.921, p = 0.003 and between ADR and estimated ADR, r(7) = 0.928, p = 0.003.

Colorectal Surgery Resident Participation in Screening Colonoscopies: How Does It Impact Quality?

BACKGROUND

Performing colonoscopies is an integral component of colorectal surgery residency training. There exists a paucity of literature regarding colonoscopy quality metrics with colorectal trainee involvement.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of colorectal surgery resident participation on quality metrics in screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Screening colonoscopies performed between August 1, 2016, and July 31, 2018, were queried from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Data were cross-checked with resident case logs to verify colonoscopies with resident participation.

SETTING

This study was conducted by the colorectal surgery department at a tertiary level hospital in the United States.

PATIENTS

Consecutive, asymptomatic patients aged ≥45 years, undergoing screening colonoscopy, were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The quality parameters measured included overall, male, and female adenoma detection rates; total examination time; withdrawal time; cecal intubation rate; quality of bowel preparation; complications; and medication dosage.

RESULTS

A total of 4594 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 60.5 ± 8.4 years (range, 45-91); 51.7% were women. Overall, 4186 of the colonoscopies were performed without resident participation, and 408 were performed with resident participation. Scope insertion, withdrawal, and total examination times were longer in the resident group. Cecal intubation rate, polypectomy rate, sex-specific and overall adenoma detection rates, and complication rates were similar between the groups. In the multivariate model, trainee involvement had no significant impact on adenoma detection rate. In addition, the trainee group utilized a higher mean dose of fentanyl.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective nature of the data with possible coding errors of the database and the inability to quantify the amount of resident participation and to clarify the degree of attending surgeon assistance and oversight were limitations of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal surgery resident participation in screening colonoscopy takes longer and appears safe, while achieving all national quality metrics without compromising adenoma detection rates. Changes in colonoscopy scheduling in regard to length of time may prove beneficial when there is resident participation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B43. PARTICIPACIÓN DE LOS RESIDENTES DE CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL EN COLONOSCOPIAS DE CRIBADO: ¿CÓMO AFECTA LA CALIDAD?: La realización de colonoscopias es un componente integral del entrenamiento de residencia en cirugía colorrectal. Existe una escasez de literatura con respecto a las medidas de calidad de la colonoscopia con la participación de los aprendices colorrectales.Investigar el efecto de la participación de residentes de cirugía colorrectal en las medidas de calidad en la colonoscopia de cribado.Las colonoscopias de cribado realizadas entre el 1 de agosto de 2016 y el 31 de julio de 2018 se consultaron desde una base de datos institucional mantenida prospectivamente. Los datos se cotejaron con registros de casos de residentes para verificar las colonoscopias con participación de residentes.Departamento de cirugía colorrectal en un hospital de tercer nivel de los Estados Unidos.Pacientes consecutivos, asintomáticos, edad ≥45 años, sometidos a colonoscopia de detección.Parámetros de calidad que incluyen tasas generales de detección de adenoma en hombres y mujeres, tiempo total de examen, tiempo de retiro, tasa de intubación cecal, calidad de la preparación intestinal, complicaciones y dosis de medicamentos.Se incluyeron un total de 4.594 pacientes en el estudio con una edad media de 60,5 ± 8,4 años (rango, 45-91) y 51,7% mujeres. En total 4,186 de las colonoscopias se realizaron sin participación de los residentes y 408 se realizaron con la participación de los residentes. Los tiempos de inserción, retiro y examen total del alcance fueron más largos en el grupo residentes. La tasa de intubación cecal, la tasa de polipectomía, las tasas de detección de adenoma específicos de género y generales, y las tasas de complicaciones fueron similares entre los grupos. En el modelo multivariado, la participación de los aprendices no tuvo un impacto significativo en la tasa de detección de adenoma. Además, el grupo de aprendices utilizó una dosis media más alta de fentanilo.Carácter retrospectivo de los datos con posibles errores de codificación de la base de datos. Incapacidad para cuantificar la cantidad de participación de los residentes y para aclarar el grado de asistencia y supervisión del cirujano.La participación de los residentes de cirugía colorrectal en la colonoscopia de cribado lleva más tiempo y parece segura, mientras se logran todas las medidas de calidad nacionales sin comprometer las tasas de detección de adenoma. Los cambios en la programación de la colonoscopia con respecto al período de tiempo pueden ser beneficiosos cuando hay participación de residentes. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B43.

Effect of fellow involvement on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effect of fellow involvement on colonoscopy outcomes is controversial. Thus, we evaluated this effect on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and on other colonoscopy quality indicators.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched up to September 2018 for studies evaluating fellow-involved colonoscopies vs. attending physicians-only examinations in terms of colonoscopy outcomes. Primary outcome was ADR, while advanced ADR (AADR), mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (MAC), cecum intubation rate (CIR) and adverse events rate comprised the secondary outcomes. The effect size on study outcomes was calculated using random-effects model and it is presented as Odds Ratio (OR) or Mean Difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Nineteen observational studies involving 34,059 patients (fellow-involved 16,875, attending physician-only 17,184) were included. Compared to the attending physician-only group, fellow involvement marginally increased ADR [OR (95%CI) = 1.12 (1.00-1.26); p = 0.06, I² = 76%]. Attending physicians with low-to-moderate ADR (<35%) benefited most from fellow's participation [OR (95%CI): 1.26 (1.13-1.40) vs. 1.12 (1.00-1.26); p = 0.03 when ADR < 35% and OR (95%CI): 1.29 (1.13-1.46) vs. 0.95 (0.78-1.16); p = 0.01 when ADR < 30%, respectively]. Moreover, fellow-involved group had higher MAC compared to attending-only group [MD (95%CI) = 0.12 (0.04-0.20); p = 0.002, I² = 53%]. No benefit from fellow involvement was detected either for AADR, CIR or adverse events rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Fellow involvement during colonoscopy is associated with more adenomas detected per procedure and with higher ADR when the attending physician-only group ADR is less than 35%.