Open-access colonoscopy: outcomes of referrals from the emergency department

Retrospective review of patients with lung cancer presenting emergently

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of lung cancer patients receive their diagnosis as part of an emergency presentation (EPs) to emergency departments (EDs).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe EPs of lung cancer at a safety-net hospital system.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with lung cancer at a safety-net ED. EP was defined as a diagnosis of lung cancer due to an acute presentation with symptoms of undiagnosed lung cancer (e.g., cough, hemoptysis, shortness of breath). Non-EPs were the result of either incidental findings (trauma pan-scan) or as part of lung cancer screening.

RESULTS

A total of 333 patient charts were reviewed who had lung cancer. Of those, 248 (74.5%) were defined as having an EP. EPs were more likely stage IV than non-EPs (50.4% vs 32.9%). The percent mortality was higher for EP versus non-EP, 60.0% vs 49.4%. which is driven by a high mortality rate for stage IV EPs (77.5%). Most patients with an EP were seen in the ED (177, 71.4%) as the location of initial visit that had a workup concerning for lung cancer. Most of the EPs were admitted for completion of either their diagnostic work up and/or for symptom management (117, 66.5%). Logistic regression identified significant predictors for an EP including stage IV at diagnosis (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.39-4.48) and lack of primary care (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.009-0.53).

CONCLUSION

Most patients with lung cancer present acutely as an EP with advanced stage in a safety-net health care setting. The ED plays an important role in the initial diagnosis of lung cancer and coordinating subsequent cancer care.

Open-access colonoscopy quality indicators and patient perception using split-dose bowel preparation

Background and Aim

Open-access (OA) colonoscopies are defined as those scheduled without a gastrointestinal (GI) office visit. Past research has not focused on split preparation use and patient perception within OA. We aim to identify differences in bowel preparation (BP) adequacy, adenoma detection rate (ADR), self-reported compliance, and patient perception between OA and GI providers using split prep.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study using split BP for colonoscopies. Patients completed a survey, and demographics, BP adequacy, and ADR were recorded. BP compliance was self-reported. Patients were asked three questions qualifying the BP instructions. Data were analyzed using chi square and Mann-Whitney tests by SPSS.

Results

BP adequacy was reported for 56 of 60 patients. Twenty-one participants (38%) were scheduled on OA, and 35 participants (62%) were scheduled after a GI office visit. Adequate BP was more frequent in 86% (18/21) of OA patients compared to 60% (21/35) in the GI group (P = 0.043). OA patients reported better review and explanation of the BP instructions compared to GI patients. There was no statistical difference between the demographics of the OA and GI groups or self-reported compliance and patient understanding of instructions.

Conclusion

OA scheduled colonoscopies were associated with more adequate BP. This could be explained by patients' self-motivation or an explanation of the importance of completing BP. This study supports the use of OA procedures as a standard of care.