1
|
Ravindran S, Matharoo M, Rutter MD, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Healey C, Thomas-Gibson S. Patient safety incidents in endoscopy: a human factors analysis of nonprocedural significant harm incidents from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). Endoscopy 2024; 56:89-99. [PMID: 37722604 DOI: 10.1055/a-2177-4130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite advances in understanding and reducing the risk of endoscopic procedures, there is little consideration of the safety of the wider endoscopy service. Patient safety incidents (PSIs) still occur. We sought to identify nonprocedural PSIs (nPSIs) and their causative factors from a human factors perspective and generate ideas for safety improvement. METHODS Endoscopy-specific PSI reports were extracted from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). A retrospective, cross-sectional human factors analysis of data was performed. Two independent researchers coded data using a hybrid thematic analysis approach. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) was used to code contributory factors. Analysis informed creation of driver diagrams and key recommendations for safety improvement in endoscopy. RESULTS From 2017 to 2019, 1181 endoscopy-specific PSIs of significant harm were reported across England and Wales, with 539 (45.6%) being nPSIs. Five categories accounted for over 80% of all incidents, with "follow-up and surveillance" being the largest (23.4% of all nPSIs). From the free-text incident reports, 487 human factors codes were identified. Decision-based errors were the most common act prior to PSI occurrence. Other frequent preconditions to incidents were focused on environmental factors, particularly overwhelmed resources, patient factors, and ineffective team communication. Lack of staffing, standard operating procedures, effective systems, and clinical pathways were also contributory. Seven key recommendations for improving safety have been made in response to our findings. CONCLUSIONS This was the first national-level human factors analysis of endoscopy-specific PSIs. This work will inform safety improvement strategies and should empower individual services to review their approach to safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Manmeet Matharoo
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Matthew David Rutter
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Hutan Ashrafian
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Ara Darzi
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Chris Healey
- Gastroenterology, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kabir M, Thomas-Gibson S, Tozer PJ, Warusavitarne J, Faiz O, Hart A, Allison L, Acheson AG, Atici SD, Avery P, Brar M, Carvello M, Choy MC, Dart RJ, Davies J, Dhar A, Din S, Hayee B, Kandiah K, Katsanos KH, Lamb CA, Limdi JK, Lovegrove RE, Myrelid P, Noor N, Papaconstantinou I, Petrova D, Pavlidis P, Pinkney T, Proud D, Radford S, Rao R, Sebastian S, Segal JP, Selinger C, Spinelli A, Thomas K, Wolthuis A, Wilson A. DECIDE: Delphi Expert Consensus Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Dysplasia Shared Management Decision-Making. J Crohns Colitis 2023; 17:1652-1671. [PMID: 37171140 DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 05/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Inflammatory bowel disease colitis-associated dysplasia is managed with either enhanced surveillance and endoscopic resection or prophylactic surgery. The rate of progression to cancer after a dysplasia diagnosis remains uncertain in many cases and patients have high thresholds for accepting proctocolectomy. Individualised discussion of management options is encouraged to take place between patients and their multidisciplinary teams for best outcomes. We aimed to develop a toolkit to support a structured, multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to discussions about dysplasia management options between clinicians and their patients. METHODS Evidence from systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods studies conducted with key stakeholders, and decision-making expert recommendations were consolidated to draft consensus statements by the DECIDE steering group. These were then subjected to an international, multidisciplinary modified electronic Delphi process until an a priori threshold of 80% agreement was achieved to establish consensus for each statement. RESULTS In all, 31 members [15 gastroenterologists, 14 colorectal surgeons and two nurse specialists] from nine countries formed the Delphi panel. We present the 18 consensus statements generated after two iterative rounds of anonymous voting. CONCLUSIONS By consolidating evidence for best practice using literature review and key stakeholder and decision-making expert consultation, we have developed international consensus recommendations to support health care professionals counselling patients on the management of high cancer risk colitis-associated dysplasia. The final toolkit includes clinician and patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Misha Kabir
- Division of GI Services, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Phil J Tozer
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Janindra Warusavitarne
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Omar Faiz
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ailsa Hart
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Lisa Allison
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - Austin G Acheson
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Semra Demirli Atici
- Department of Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey
| | - Pearl Avery
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Mantaj Brar
- Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Michele Carvello
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
- Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Matthew C Choy
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Division of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Austin Academic Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Robin J Dart
- Department of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London, London, UK
| | - Justin Davies
- Department of Gastroenterology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Anjan Dhar
- Department of Gastroenterology, Darlington Memorial Hospital, County Durham & Darlington NHS Foundation Trust, Darlington, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Teesside University, UK, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Shahida Din
- Edinburgh IBD Unit, NHS Lothian, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Bu'Hussain Hayee
- Department of Gastroenterology, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Kesavan Kandiah
- Department of Gastroenterology, St. George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Konstantinos H Katsanos
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Ioannina School of Health Sciences, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Christopher Andrew Lamb
- Translational & Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Jimmy K Limdi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Greater Manchester, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
| | - Richard E Lovegrove
- Department of Surgery, Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust , Worcester, UK
| | - Pär Myrelid
- Department of Surgery, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Nurulamin Noor
- Department of Gastroenterology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ioannis Papaconstantinou
- Department of Surgery, Aretaieion Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, A thens, Greece
| | - Dafina Petrova
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, Granada, Spain
- Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública [EASP], Granada, Spain
- CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health [CIBERESP], Madrid, Spain
| | - Polychronis Pavlidis
- Department of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Thomas Pinkney
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - David Proud
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg Victoria, VIC, Australia
| | - Shellie Radford
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Rohit Rao
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Shaji Sebastian
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
| | - Jonathan P Segal
- Department of Gastroenterology, Northern Hospital Epping, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Christian Selinger
- Department of Gastroenterology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Kathryn Thomas
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals, UK
| | - Albert Wolthuis
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, The Netherlands
| | - Ana Wilson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer or Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London , London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology or Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kabir M, Thomas-Gibson S, Ahmad A, Kader R, Al-Hillawi L, Mcguire J, David L, Shah K, Rao R, Vega R, East JE, Faiz OD, Hart AL, Wilson A. Cancer Biology or Ineffective Surveillance? A multicentre retrospective analysis of colitis-associated post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers. J Crohns Colitis 2023:jjad189. [PMID: 37941424 DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad189] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with high rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC), but further in-depth qualitative analyses are required to determine whether they result from inadequate surveillance or aggressive IBD cancer evolution. METHODS All IBD patients who had a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed between January 2015 to July 2019 and a recent (<4 years) surveillance colonoscopy at one of four English hospital trusts underwent root cause analyses as recommended by the World Endoscopy Organisation to identify plausible PCCRC causative factors. RESULTS 61% (n=22/36) of the included IBD CRCs were PCCRCs. They developed in patients with high cancer risk factors (77.8%; n=28/36) requiring annual surveillance, yet 57.1% (n=20/35) had inappropriately delayed surveillance. Most PCCRCs developed in situations where (i) an endoscopically unresectable lesion was detected (40.9%; n=9/22), (ii) there was a deviation from the planned management pathway (40.9%; n=9/22) e.g. service, clinician or patient-related delays in acting on a detected lesion, or (iii) lesions were potentially missed as they were typically located within areas of active inflammation or post-inflammatory change (36.4%; n=8/22). CONCLUSIONS IBD PCCRC prevention will require more proactive strategies to reduce endoscopic inflammatory burden, improve lesion optical characterisation, adherence to recommended surveillance intervals and patient acceptance of prophylactic colectomy. However, the significant proportion appearing to originate from non-adenomatous-looking mucosa which fail to yield neoplasia on biopsy yet display aggressive cancer evolution highlight the limitations of current surveillance. Emerging molecular biomarkers may play a role in enhancing cancer risk stratification in future clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Misha Kabir
- Division of GI Services, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 250 Euston Road, London
- Imperial College London, UK
| | | | - Ahmir Ahmad
- Imperial College London, UK
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital, UK
| | - Rawen Kader
- Division of GI Services, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, UK
| | - Lulia Al-Hillawi
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Joshua Mcguire
- Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, UK
- Department of gastroenterology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Lewis David
- Department of gastroenterology, East and North Hertfordshire, UK
| | - Krishna Shah
- Department of gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK
| | - Rohit Rao
- Department of gastroenterology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Roser Vega
- Division of GI Services, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - James E East
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Omar D Faiz
- Imperial College London, UK
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, UK
| | - Ailsa L Hart
- Imperial College London, UK
- IBD Unit, St Mark's Hospital, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- Imperial College London, UK
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ravindran S, Matharoo M, Marshall S, Robinson E, Bano M, Bassett P, Coleman M, Rutter M, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Healey C, Thomas-Gibson S. Development, validation, and results of a national endoscopy safety attitudes questionnaire (Endo-SAQ). Endosc Int Open 2023; 11:E679-E689. [PMID: 37502673 PMCID: PMC10370487 DOI: 10.1055/a-2112-5105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and study aims Safety attitudes are linked to patient outcomes. The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) identifies the need to improve our understanding of safety culture in endoscopy. We describe the development and validation of the Endo-SAQ (endoscopy safety attitudes questionnaire) and the results of a national survey of staff attitudes. Methods Questions from the original SAQ were adapted to reflect endoscopy-specific content. This was refined by an expert group, followed by a pilot study to assess acceptability. The refined Endo-SAQ (comprising 35 questions across six domains) was disseminated to endoscopy staff across the UK and Ireland. Outcomes were domain scores and the percentage of positive responses (score ≥75/100) per domain. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Binary logistic regression identified staff and service factors associated with positive scores. Validity and reliability of Endo-SAQ were assessed through psychometric analysis. Results After expert review, four questions in the preliminary Endo-SAQ were adjusted. Sixty-one participants undertook the pilot study with good acceptability. A total of 453 participants completed the refined Endo-SAQ. There were positive responses in teamwork, safety climate, job satisfaction, and working conditions domains. Endoscopists had significantly more positive responses to stress recognition and working conditions than nursing staff. JAG accreditation was associated with positive scores in safety climate and job satisfaction domains. Endo-SAQ met thresholds of construct validity and reliability. Conclusions Endoscopy staff had largely positive safety attitudes scores but there were significant differences across domains and staff. There is evidence for the validity and reliability of Endo-SAQ. Endo-SAQ could complement current measures of patient safety in endoscopy and be used in evaluation and research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Manmeet Matharoo
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Sarah Marshall
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Emma Robinson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Madeline Bano
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Paul Bassett
- Statistics, Statsconsultancy Ltd, Amersham, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Mark Coleman
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Matt Rutter
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Hutan Ashrafian
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Ara Darzi
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Chris Healey
- Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tate DJ, Argenziano ME, Anderson J, Bhandari P, Boškoski I, Bugajski M, Desomer L, Heitman SJ, Kashida H, Kriazhov V, Lee RRT, Lyutakov I, Pimentel-Nunes P, Rivero-Sánchez L, Thomas-Gibson S, Thorlacius H, Bourke MJ, Tham TC, Bisschops R. Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2023. [PMID: 37285908 DOI: 10.1055/a-2077-0497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Tate
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Maria Eva Argenziano
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Emergency Digestive Endoscopy, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - John Anderson
- Cheltenham General Hospital, Gloucestershire Hospitals Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Pradeep Bhandari
- Endoscopy Department, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Ivo Boškoski
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Marek Bugajski
- Department of Gastroenterology, Luxmed Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Lobke Desomer
- AZ Delta Roeselare, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Steven J Heitman
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Departments of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Hiroshi Kashida
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University, Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Vladimir Kriazhov
- Endoscopy Department, Nizhny Novgorod Regional Clinical Oncology Center, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia Federation
| | - Ralph R T Lee
- The Ottawa Hospital - Civic Campus, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Ivan Lyutakov
- University Hospital Tsaritsa Yoanna-ISUL, Medical University Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
| | - Pedro Pimentel-Nunes
- Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Center for Research in Health Technologies and Information Systems (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Surgery and Physiology Department, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Liseth Rivero-Sánchez
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red de Enfermedades Hepaticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | - Michael J Bourke
- Department of Gastroenterology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
- University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tony C Tham
- Division of Gastroenterology, Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, Belfast, Northern Ireland
| | - Raf Bisschops
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospitals Leuven, TARGID, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Shiha MG, Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Sanders DS, Ching HL. Importance of non-technical skills: SACRED in advanced endoscopy. Frontline Gastroenterol 2023; 14:527-529. [PMID: 37854775 PMCID: PMC10579545 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2023-102434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 04/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Mohamed G Shiha
- Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
- Department of Infection Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - David Surendran Sanders
- Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
- Department of Infection Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Hey-Long Ching
- Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Siau K, Pelitari S, Green S, McKaig B, Rajendran A, Feeney M, Thoufeeq M, Anderson J, Ravindran V, Hagan P, Cripps N, Beales ILP, Church K, Church NI, Ratcliffe E, Din S, Pullan RD, Powell S, Regan C, Ngu WS, Wood E, Mills S, Hawkes N, Dunckley P, Iacucci M, Thomas-Gibson S, Wells C, Murugananthan A. JAG consensus statements for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy. Frontline Gastroenterol 2023; 14:181-200. [PMID: 37056324 PMCID: PMC10086722 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2022-102259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
IntroductionJoint Advisory Group (JAG) certification in endoscopy is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update standards for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS).MethodsA modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety representation from experts and trainees. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on FS training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by national stakeholders for incorporation into the JAG FS certification pathway.ResultsIn total, 41 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (17), assessment of competence (7) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (A) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (B) minimum procedure count ≥175; (C) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (D) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Lower gastrointestinal Endoscopy course; (E) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedural skill (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skill (SMSA level 1); (F) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool and (G) successful performance in summative DOPS.ConclusionThe UK standards for training and certification in FS have been updated to support training, uphold standards in FS and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith Siau
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, UK
- University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK
| | - Stavroula Pelitari
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Susi Green
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK
| | - Brian McKaig
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Arun Rajendran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Mark Feeney
- Department of Gastroenterology, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK
| | - Mo Thoufeeq
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - John Anderson
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Vathsan Ravindran
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, Harrow, UK
| | - Paul Hagan
- Endoscopy, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK
| | - Neil Cripps
- Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK
| | - Ian L P Beales
- University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK
| | | | | | - Elizabeth Ratcliffe
- Department of Gastroenterology, Wrightington Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, UK
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Said Din
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Rupert D Pullan
- Colorectal Surgery, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK
| | - Sharon Powell
- Endoscopy, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Catherine Regan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Wee Sing Ngu
- Colorectal Surgery, City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, UK
| | - Eleanor Wood
- Gastroenterology, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Sarah Mills
- Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Neil Hawkes
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, UK
| | - Paul Dunckley
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucester, UK
| | - Marietta Iacucci
- University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Imperial College London, London, UK
- St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, Harrow, UK
| | - Christopher Wells
- Department of Gastroenterology, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Hartlepool, UK
| | - Aravinth Murugananthan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK
- Faculty of Health, Education and Life Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Siau K, Pelitari S, Green S, McKaig B, Rajendran A, Feeney M, Thoufeeq M, Anderson J, Ravindran V, Hagan P, Cripps N, Beales ILP, Church K, Church NI, Ratcliffe E, Din S, Pullan RD, Powell S, Regan C, Ngu WS, Wood E, Mills S, Hawkes N, Dunckley P, Iacucci M, Thomas-Gibson S, Wells C, Murugananthan A. JAG consensus statements for training and certification in colonoscopy. Frontline Gastroenterol 2023; 14:201-221. [PMID: 37056319 PMCID: PMC10086724 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2022-102260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
IntroductionIn the UK, endoscopy certification is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for colonoscopy training and certification.MethodsUnder the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety expert representation. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on colonoscopy training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholders for incorporation into the updated colonoscopy certification pathway.ResultsIn total, 45 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (20), assessment of competence (8) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (1) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, unassisted caecal intubation rate >90%, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp detection rate >15%+, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate–severe discomfort); (2) minimum procedure count 280+; (3) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (4) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Colonoscopy course; (5) terminal ileal intubation rates of 60%+ in inflammatory bowel disease; (6) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedure skills (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skills (Size, Morphology, Site, Access (SMSA) level 2); (7) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool; (8) successful performance in summative DOPS.ConclusionThe UK standards for training and certification in colonoscopy have been updated, culminating in a single-stage certification process with emphasis on polypectomy competency (SMSA Level 2+). These standards are intended to support training, improve standards of colonoscopy and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith Siau
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall, UK
- University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Stavroula Pelitari
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK
| | - Susi Green
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, West Sussex, UK
| | - Brian McKaig
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Arun Rajendran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, Greater London, UK
| | - Mark Feeney
- Department of Gastroenterology, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, Torbay, UK
| | - Mo Thoufeeq
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - John Anderson
- Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, UK
| | - Vathsan Ravindran
- Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Paul Hagan
- Endoscopy, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK
| | - Neil Cripps
- Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, West Sussex, UK
| | - Ian L P Beales
- Department of Gastroenterology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, Norfolk, UK
- University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, UK
| | | | - Nicholas I Church
- Department of Gastroenterology, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Elizabeth Ratcliffe
- Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Wrightington Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, Wigan, UK
| | - Said Din
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Rupert D Pullan
- Colorectal Surgery, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, Torbay, UK
| | - Sharon Powell
- Endoscopy, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Catherine Regan
- Endoscopy, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Wee Sing Ngu
- Colorectal Surgery, City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, Tyne and Wear, UK
| | - Eleanor Wood
- Department of Gastroenterology, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK
| | - Sarah Mills
- Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Neil Hawkes
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, UK
| | - Paul Dunckley
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucester, Gloucestershire, UK
| | - Marietta Iacucci
- University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Imperial College London, London, UK
- St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Christopher Wells
- Department of Gastroenterology, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Hartlepool, Hartlepool, UK
| | - Aravinth Murugananthan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
- Faculty of Health, Education and Life Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sebastian S, Dhar A, Baddeley R, Donnelly L, Haddock R, Arasaradnam R, Coulter A, Disney BR, Griffiths H, Healey C, Hillson R, Steinbach I, Marshall S, Rajendran A, Rochford A, Thomas-Gibson S, Siddhi S, Stableforth W, Wesley E, Brett B, Morris AJ, Douds A, Coleman MG, Veitch AM, Hayee B. Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy. Gut 2023; 72:12-26. [PMID: 36229172 PMCID: PMC9763195 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-328460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/08/2022]
Abstract
GI endoscopy is highly resource-intensive with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and waste generation. Sustainable endoscopy in the context of climate change is now the focus of mainstream discussions between endoscopy providers, units and professional societies. In addition to broader global challenges, there are some specific measures relevant to endoscopy units and their practices, which could significantly reduce environmental impact. Awareness of these issues and guidance on practical interventions to mitigate the carbon footprint of GI endoscopy are lacking. In this consensus, we discuss practical measures to reduce the impact of endoscopy on the environment applicable to endoscopy units and practitioners. Adoption of these measures will facilitate and promote new practices and the evolution of a more sustainable specialty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shaji Sebastian
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, East Riding of Yorkshire, UK .,Clinical Sciences Centre, Hull York Medical School, Hull, UK
| | - Anjan Dhar
- Department of Gastroenterology, Darlington Memorial Hospital, Darlington, UK,School of Health & Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Robin Baddeley
- Institute for Therapeutic Endoscopy, King's College Hospital, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's National Bowel Hospital & Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Leigh Donnelly
- Department of Gastroenterology, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Shields, UK
| | - Rosemary Haddock
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, UK
| | - Ramesh Arasaradnam
- Applied Biological and Experimental Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | - Archibald Coulter
- Department of Gastroenterology, Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton, UK
| | - Benjamin Robert Disney
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | - Helen Griffiths
- Department of Gastroenterology, Brecon War Memorial Hospital, Brecon, UK
| | - Christopher Healey
- Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, UK
| | | | | | - Sarah Marshall
- Bowel Cancer Screening & Endoscopy, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Harrow, UK,Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy, London, UK
| | - Arun Rajendran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Andrew Rochford
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Free Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's National Bowel Hospital & Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Sandeep Siddhi
- Department of Gastroenterology, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK
| | - William Stableforth
- Departments of Gastroenterology & Endoscopy, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, UK
| | - Emma Wesley
- Departments of Gastroenterology & Endoscopy, Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton, UK
| | - Bernard Brett
- Department of Gastroenterology, Norfolk and Norwich Hospitals NHS Trust, Norwich, UK
| | | | - Andrew Douds
- Department of Gastroenterology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust, Norwich, UK
| | - Mark Giles Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy, London, UK,Department of Colorectal Surgery, Plymouth University Hospitals Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Andrew M Veitch
- Department of Gastroenterology, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Bu'Hussain Hayee
- King's Health Partners Institute for Therapeutic Endoscopy, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ahmad A, Wilson A, Haycock A, Humphries A, Monahan K, Suzuki N, Thomas-Gibson S, Vance M, Bassett P, Thiruvilangam K, Dhillon A, Saunders BP. Evaluation of a real-time computer-aided polyp detection system during screening colonoscopy: AI-DETECT study. Endoscopy 2022; 55:313-319. [PMID: 36509103 DOI: 10.1055/a-1966-0661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Polyp detection and resection during colonoscopy significantly reduce long-term colorectal cancer risk. Computer-aided detection (CADe) may increase polyp identification but has undergone limited clinical evaluation. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of CADe at colonoscopy within a bowel cancer screening program (BCSP). METHODS This prospective, randomized controlled trial involved all eight screening-accredited colonoscopists at an English National Health Service (NHS) BCSP center (February 2020 to December 2021). Patients were randomized to CADe or standard colonoscopy. Patients meeting NHS criteria for bowel cancer screening were included. The primary outcome of interest was polyp detection rate (PDR). RESULTS 658 patients were invited and 44 were excluded. A total of 614 patients were randomized to CADe (n = 308) or standard colonoscopy (n = 306); 35 cases were excluded from the per-protocol analysis due to poor bowel preparation (n = 10), an incomplete procedure (n = 24), or a data issue (n = 1). Endocuff Vision was frequently used and evenly distributed (71.7 % CADe and 69.2 % standard). On intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, there was a borderline significant difference in PDR (85.7 % vs. 79.7 %; P = 0.05) but no significant difference in adenoma detection rate (ADR; 71.4 % vs. 65.0 %; P = 0.09) for CADe vs. standard groups, respectively. On per-protocol analysis, no significant difference was observed in these rates. There was no significant difference in procedure times. CONCLUSIONS In high-performing colonoscopists in a BCSP who routinely used Endocuff Vision, CADe improved PDR but not ADR. CADe appeared to have limited benefit in a BCSP setting where procedures are performed by experienced colonoscopists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmir Ahmad
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ana Wilson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Haycock
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Humphries
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Kevin Monahan
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Noriko Suzuki
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Margaret Vance
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Angad Dhillon
- Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Brian P Saunders
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ahmad A, Moorghen M, Wilson A, Stasinos I, Haycock A, Humphries A, Monahan K, Suzuki N, Thomas-Gibson S, Vance M, Thiruvilangam K, Dhillon A, Saunders BP. Implementation of optical diagnosis with a "resect and discard" strategy in clinical practice: DISCARD3 study. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96:1021-1032.e2. [PMID: 35724693 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.06.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Revised: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 06/11/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Optical diagnosis (OD) of polyps can be performed with advanced endoscopic imaging. For high-confidence diagnoses, a "resect and discard" strategy could offer significant histopathology time and cost savings. The implementation threshold is a ≥90% OD-histology surveillance interval concordance. Here we assessed the OD learning curve and feasibility of a resect and discard strategy for ≤5-mm and <10-mm polyps in a bowel cancer screening setting. METHODS In this prospective feasibility study, 8 bowel cancer screening endoscopists completed a validated OD training module and performed procedures. All <10-mm consecutive polyps had white-light and narrow-band images taken and were given high- or low-confidence diagnoses until 120 high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp diagnoses had been performed. All polyps had standard histology. High-confidence OD errors underwent root-cause analysis. Histology and OD-derived surveillance intervals were calculated. RESULTS Of 565 invited patients, 525 patients were included. A total of 1560 <10-mm polyps underwent OD and were resected and retrieved (1329 ≤5 mm and 231 6-9 mm). There were no <10-mm polyp cancers. High-confidence OD was accurate in 81.5% of ≤5-mm and 92.8% of 6-9-mm polyps. Sensitivity for OD of a ≤5-mm adenoma was 93.0% with a positive predictive value of 90.8%. OD-histology surveillance interval concordance for ≤5-mm OD was 91.3% (209/229) for U.S. Multi-Society Task Force, 98.3% (225/229) for European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and 98.7% (226/229) for British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines, respectively. CONCLUSIONS A resect and discard strategy for high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp OD in a group of bowel cancer screening colonoscopists is feasible and safe, with performance exceeding the 90% surveillance interval concordance required for implementation in clinical practice. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04710693.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmir Ahmad
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Morgan Moorghen
- Pathology Department, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | | | - Adam Haycock
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Adam Humphries
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Kevin Monahan
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Noriko Suzuki
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | | | - Margaret Vance
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| | | | - Angad Dhillon
- Gastroenterology Department, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Brian P Saunders
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Oxentenko A, Thomas-Gibson S, Charabaty A. Closing the gender gap in gastroenterology leadership: the need for effective and comprehensive allyship. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 7:1070-1072. [PMID: 36370733 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(22)00345-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2022] [Revised: 10/04/2022] [Accepted: 10/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Oxentenko
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- St Mark's National Bowel Hospital and Academic Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Aline Charabaty
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Washington DC 20016, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ravindran S, Cavilla R, Ashrafian H, Haycock A, Healey C, Coleman M, Archer S, Darzi A, Thomas-Gibson S. Development of the "Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills" (TEAM-ENTS) behavioral marker system. Endoscopy 2022; 55:403-412. [PMID: 36223812 DOI: 10.1055/a-1959-6123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Non-technical skills (NTS) are integral to team performance and subsequent quality and safety of care. Behavioral marker systems (BMSs) are now increasingly used in healthcare to support the training and assessment of team NTS. Within gastrointestinal endoscopy, this is an area of novel research. The aims of this study were to define the core relevant NTS for endoscopy teams and develop a preliminary framework for a team-based BMS known as TEAM-ENTS (Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills). METHODS This study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, a literature review of team-based BMSs was performed to inform an interview study of core endoscopy team members. Cognitive task analysis was used to break down the NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Framework analysis generated the structure for the preliminary TEAM-ENTS framework. In phase 2, a modified Delphi process was undertaken to refine the items of the framework. RESULTS Seven consultant endoscopists and six nurses were interviewed. The final coding framework consisted of 88 codes grouped into five overarching categories. In total, 58 participants were recruited to the Delphi panel. In the first round, nine elements and 37 behavioral descriptors did not meet consensus. Following item adjustment, merging and deletion, all remaining items met consensus thresholds after the second round. The refined TEAM-ENTS BMS consists of five categories, 16 elements, and 47 behavioral descriptors. CONCLUSIONS The refined TEAM-ENTS behavioral marker system was developed to reflect the core NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Future studies will aim to fully validate this tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK.,Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK.,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Hutan Ashrafian
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Adam Haycock
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Chris Healey
- Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Steph Archer
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ara Darzi
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK.,Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Ha SM, Sheehan D, Shalabi A, West MA, Ilangovan R, Moorghen M, Jenkins JT, Thomas-Gibson S. Should you trust the radiologist? Gut 2022; 71:2193-2299. [PMID: 34145044 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-325129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2021] [Accepted: 06/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Sun Mi Ha
- St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK
| | - Donal Sheehan
- St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK
| | - Ahmed Shalabi
- St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Bano M, Robinson E, Jenkins A, Marshall S, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Coleman M, Healey C. The national census of UK endoscopy services 2021. Future Healthc J 2022; 9:16-17. [PMID: 36310960 PMCID: PMC9601067 DOI: 10.7861/fhj.9-2-s16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Ara Darzi
- DImperial College London, London, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Bano M, Robinson E, Jenkins A, Marshall S, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Coleman M, Healey C. National census of UK endoscopy services 2021. Frontline Gastroenterol 2022; 13:463-470. [PMID: 36250173 PMCID: PMC9555135 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2022-102157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2022] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy (JAG) biennial census provides a unique view of UK endoscopy. The 2021 census was conducted to understand the impact of ongoing pressures, highlighted in the previous census, as well as COVID-19. METHODS The census was sent to all JAG-registered services in April 2021. Data were analysed across the domains of activity, waiting time targets, workforce, COVID-19, safety, GI bleeding, anaesthetic support, equipment and decontamination. Statistical methods were used to determine associations between domain-specific outcome variables and core demographic data. RESULTS 321 services completed the census (79.2% response rate). In the first 3 months of 2021, 57.9% of NHS services met urgent cancer waits, 17.9% met routine waits and 13.4% met surveillance waits. Workforce redeployment was the predominant reason cited for not meeting targets. There were significant regional differences in the proportion of patients waiting 6 or more weeks (p=0.001). During the pandemic, 64.8% of NHS services had staff redeployed and there was a mean sickness rate of 8.5%. Services were, on average, at 79.3% activity compared with 2 years ago. JAG-accredited services are more likely to meet urgent cancer waits, with a lower proportion of patient waiting 6 weeks or more (p=0.03). Over 10% of services stated that equipment shortage interfered with service delivery. CONCLUSIONS Services are adapting to continued pressure and there are signs of a focused response to demand at a time of ongoing uncertainty. This census' findings will inform ongoing guidance from JAG and relevant stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK,Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Madeline Bano
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Emma Robinson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Anna Jenkins
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Sarah Marshall
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,St. Mark’s Bowel Cancer Screening Centre, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Hutan Ashrafian
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ara Darzi
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Chris Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale General Hospital, Keighley, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Curtius K, Kabir M, Al Bakir I, Choi CHR, Hartono JL, Johnson M, East JE, Lindsay JO, Vega R, Thomas-Gibson S, Warusavitarne J, Wilson A, Graham TA, Hart A. Multicentre derivation and validation of a colitis-associated colorectal cancer risk prediction web tool. Gut 2022; 71:705-715. [PMID: 33990383 PMCID: PMC8921573 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-323546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2020] [Revised: 03/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) diagnosed with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) have increased risk of developing advanced neoplasia (AN: high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer). We aimed to develop and validate a predictor of AN risk in patients with UC with LGD and create a visual web tool to effectively communicate the risk. DESIGN In our retrospective multicentre validated cohort study, adult patients with UC with an index diagnosis of LGD, identified from four UK centres between 2001 and 2019, were followed until progression to AN. In the discovery cohort (n=246), a multivariate risk prediction model was derived from clinicopathological features using Cox regression. Validation used data from three external centres (n=198). The validated model was embedded in a web tool to calculate patient-specific risk. RESULTS Four clinicopathological variables were significantly associated with AN progression in the discovery cohort: endoscopically visible LGD >1 cm (HR 2.7; 95% CI 1.2 to 5.9), unresectable or incomplete endoscopic resection (HR 3.4; 95% CI 1.6 to 7.4), moderate/severe histological inflammation within 5 years of LGD diagnosis (HR 3.1; 95% CI 1.5 to 6.7) and multifocality (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 6.2). In the validation cohort, this four-variable model accurately predicted future AN cases with overall calibration Observed/Expected=1.01 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.52), and achieved 100% specificity for the lowest risk group over 13 years of available follow-up. CONCLUSION Multicohort validation confirms that patients with large, unresected, multifocal LGD and recent moderate/severe inflammation are at highest risk of developing AN. Personalised risk prediction provided via the Ulcerative Colitis-Cancer Risk Estimator ( www.UC-CaRE.uk ) can support treatment decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kit Curtius
- Centre for Genomics and Computational Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Division of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA
| | - Misha Kabir
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Ibrahim Al Bakir
- Centre for Genomics and Computational Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Chang Ho Ryan Choi
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, St George Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Juanda L Hartono
- Division of Gastroenterology, National University Hospital, Singapore
- Department of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Michael Johnson
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - James E East
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - James O Lindsay
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Roser Vega
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Janindra Warusavitarne
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Colorectal Surgery and Lennard-Jones Intestinal Failure Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
| | - Trevor A Graham
- Centre for Genomics and Computational Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ailsa Hart
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ahmad A, Dhillon A, Saunders BP, Kabir M, Thomas-Gibson S. Validation of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) cases reported at national level following local root cause analysis: REFLECT study. Frontline Gastroenterol 2022; 13:374-380. [PMID: 36051952 PMCID: PMC9380767 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2021-102016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2021] [Accepted: 01/05/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Our aim was to determine aetiology of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) identified from population-based data through local root cause analysis at a high-volume mixed secondary and tertiary referral centre. DESIGN/METHOD A subset of national cancer registration data, collected by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, was used to determine PCCRCs diagnosed between 2005 and 2013 at our centre.Root cause analysis was performed for each identified PCCRC, using World Endoscopy Organisation recommendations, to validate it and assess most plausible explanation. We also assessed whether patient, clinician and/or service factors were primarily responsible. RESULTS Of 107 'PCCRC' cases provided from the national dataset, 20 were excluded (16 missing data, 4 duplicates). 87 'PCCRC' cases were included of which 58 were true PCCRCs and 29 false PCCRCs.False PCCRCs comprised 17 detected cancers (cancer diagnosed within 6 months of negative colonoscopy) and 12 cases did not meet PCCRC criteria. Inflammatory bowel disease was the most common risk factor (18/58) and the most common site was rectum (19/58). The most common explanation was 'possible missed lesion, prior examination negative but inadequate' (23/58) and clinician factors were primarily responsible for PCCRC occurrence in most cases (37/58). CONCLUSION Our single-centre study shows, after local analysis, there was misclassification of PCCRCs identified from a population-based registry. The degree of such error will vary between registries. Most PCCRCs occurred in cases of sub-optimal examination as indicated by poor photodocumentation. Effective mechanisms to feedback root cause analyses are critical for quality improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmir Ahmad
- St Mark's Hospital, Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, London, UK
| | - Angad Dhillon
- St Mark's Hospital, Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, London, UK
| | | | - Misha Kabir
- St Mark's Hospital, Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Baddeley R, de Santiago ER, Maurice J, Siddhi S, Dhar A, Thomas-Gibson S, Hayee B. Sustainability in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 7:9-12. [PMID: 34735864 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(21)00389-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Robin Baddeley
- King's Health Partners Institute for Therapeutic Endoscopy, King's College Hospital, London, UK; Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK.
| | - Enrique Rodriguez de Santiago
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, Spain
| | - James Maurice
- Department of Gastroenterology, Whipps Cross Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Sandeep Siddhi
- Department of Digestive Diseases, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Anjan Dhar
- School of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK; Department of Gastroenterology, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust, Darlington, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK; Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Bu Hayee
- King's Health Partners Institute for Therapeutic Endoscopy, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Dhillon AS, Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S. Recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection: there's more to it than meets the eye. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94:376-378. [PMID: 33975715 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.03.060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/27/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
|
21
|
Kabir M, Thomas-Gibson S, Hart AL, Wilson A. Perception of Cancer Risk and Management Practice for Colitis-associated Dysplasia Is Influenced by Colonoscopy Experience and Workplace Affiliation: Results of an International Clinician Survey. J Crohns Colitis 2021; 16:39-48. [PMID: 34155511 PMCID: PMC8797167 DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS A successful colitis cancer surveillance programme requires effective action to be taken when dysplasia is detected. This is the first international cross-sectional study to evaluate clinician understanding of dysplasia-cancer risk and management practice since the most recent international guidelines were introduced in 2015. METHODS A 15-item international online survey was disseminated to gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons. RESULTS A total of 294 clinicians [93.5% gastroenterologists] from 60 countries responded; 23% did not have access to high-definition chromoendoscopy. University hospitals were more likely than non-academic workplaces to provide second expert histopathologist review [67% vs 46%; p = 0.002] and formal multidisciplinary team meeting discussion [73% vs 52%; p = 0.001] of dysplasia cases. Perceptions of 5-year cancer risk associated with endoscopically unresectable low-grade dysplasia varied between 0% and 100%. Non-academic hospital affiliation was predictive of lower perceived cancer risks. Although most [98.4%] respondents advised a colectomy for endoscopically unresectable visible high-grade dysplasia, only 34.4% advised a colectomy for unresectable visible low-grade dysplasia. Respondents from university hospitals were more likely to consider colectomy for multifocal low-grade dysplasia (odds ratio [OR] 2.17). If invisible unifocal low-grade dysplasia was detected, continued surveillance over colectomy was the preferred management among clinicians working mainly in private clinics [OR 9.4] and least preferred in those who had performed more than 50 surveillance colonoscopies [OR 0.41]. CONCLUSIONS Clinicians with less surveillance colonoscopy experience and from non-academic centres appear to have lower cancer risk perceptions and are less likely to advocate colectomy for higher-risk low-grade dysplasia. Further education may align current management practice with clinical guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Misha Kabir
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK,Corresponding author: Dr Misha Kabir, MBBS, MA (cantab), MRCP, Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark’s Hospital, Watford Road, Middlesex HA1 3UJ, UK. Tel.: +44 020 8864 3232;
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK,Department of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ailsa L Hart
- Department of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Rajendran A, Thomas-Gibson S, Bassett P, Dunckley P, Rameshshanker R, Sevdalis N, Haycock A. Lower gastrointestinal polypectomy competencies in the United Kingdom: a retrospective analysis of Directly Observed Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS). Endoscopy 2021; 53:629-635. [PMID: 32767282 DOI: 10.1055/a-1234-8233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Polypectomy is often the most hazardous part of colonoscopy. There is significant variability in polypectomy training and assessment internationally. DOPyS (Directly Observed Polypectomy Skills) is a validated assessment tool and is used to demonstrate polypectomy competency in the UK. This study aimed to describe the learning curve for polypectomy competency in UK trainees. METHODS Retrospective DOPyS data (January 2009 to September 2015) were obtained from the UK Joint Advisory Group (JAG) for intestinal endoscopy training system (JETS) national database. The number of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) procedures, overall cecal intubation rate (CIR), procedure intensity, and time in days to the first DOPyS assessment were recorded, and time to JAG certification was calculated. RESULTS 4965 DOPyS assessments from 336 trainees were analyzed. Within the study period, 124 and 53 trainees achieved provisional and full colonoscopy certification, respectively. Trainees started formative assessment of polypectomy after > 130 LGI procedures and with a CIR of > 70 %. Within 3 years from the first DOPyS assessment, 94 % of trainees achieved provisional certification, and 50 % full certification. Higher procedure intensity at baseline DOPyS assessment was associated with a higher likelihood of obtaining certification sooner. CONCLUSION There is a significant variation in time to competency, and this potentially reflects the time necessary to acquire polypectomy skills. There is a need to start polypectomy training earlier, once sufficient skills, such as tip control, have been achieved to shorten the time to competency. Overall, the CIR could be used as a guide for such technical skills. Increasing exposure to training lists also potentially reduces the time to polypectomy competency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arun Rajendran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, London, UK.,The Wolfson Unit of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK.,Centre for Implementation Science, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- The Wolfson Unit of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Paul Dunckley
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Rajaratnam Rameshshanker
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, London, UK.,The Wolfson Unit of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Nick Sevdalis
- Centre for Implementation Science, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - Adam Haycock
- The Wolfson Unit of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Siau K, Smith GV, Coleman M, Rees C, Healey C. Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) framework for managing underperformance in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Frontline Gastroenterol 2021; 13:5-11. [PMID: 34970427 PMCID: PMC8666862 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2021-101830] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2021] [Revised: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 04/21/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Underperformance can be defined as performance which persistently falls below a desired minimum standard considered acceptable for patient care. Within gastrointestinal endoscopy, underperformance may be multifactorial, related to an individual's knowledge, skills, attitudes, health or external factors. If left unchecked, underperformance has the potential to impact on care and ultimately patient safety. Managing underperformance should be a key attribute of high-quality endoscopy service, as recognised in the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) accreditation process. However, it is recognised that not all services have robust mechanisms to do this. This article provides the JAG position on managing underperformance in endoscopy, defined through a practical framework. This follows a stepwise process of detecting underperformance, verification, identification of additional causative factors, providing support and reassessment. Detection and verification of issues may require use of multiple evidence sources, including performance data, feedback and appraisal reports. Where technical underperformance is identified, this should be risk stratified by potential risk to patient safety. Support should be tailored to each individual case based on the type of underperformance detected, any causative factors with an action plan developed. Support may include coaching, mentoring, training and upskilling. Wider support from the medical director's office or external services may also be required. Monitoring and reassessment is a crucial part of the overall process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, London, UK
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Keith Siau
- Department of Gastroenterology, Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Trust, Dudley, UK
| | - Geoff V Smith
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Health Education England South West, Bristol, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Colin Rees
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University Centre for Cancer, South Shields, UK
| | - Chris Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale General Hospital, Keighley, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Medina-Prado L, Hassan C, Dekker E, Bisschops R, Alfieri S, Bhandari P, Bourke MJ, Bravo R, Bustamante-Balen M, Dominitz J, Ferlitsch M, Fockens P, van Leerdam M, Lieberman D, Herráiz M, Kahi C, Kaminski M, Matsuda T, Moss A, Pellisé M, Pohl H, Rees C, Rex DK, Romero-Simó M, Rutter MD, Sharma P, Shaukat A, Thomas-Gibson S, Valori R, Jover R. When and How To Use Endoscopic Tattooing in the Colon: An International Delphi Agreement. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 19:1038-1050. [PMID: 33493699 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.01.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Revised: 12/27/2020] [Accepted: 01/18/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS There is a lack of clinical studies to establish indications and methodology for tattooing, therefore technique and practice of tattooing is very variable. We aimed to establish a consensus on the indications and appropriate techniques for colonic tattoo through a modified Delphi process. METHODS The baseline questionnaire was classified into 3 areas: where tattooing should not be used (1 domain, 6 questions), where tattooing should be used (4 domains, 20 questions), and how to perform tattooing (1 domain 20 questions). A total of 29 experts participated in the 3 rounds of the Delphi process. RESULTS A total of 15 statements were approved. The statements that achieved the highest agreement were as follows: tattooing should always be used after endoscopic resection of a lesion with suspicion of submucosal invasion (agreement score, 4.59; degree of consensus, 97%). For a colorectal lesion that is left in situ but considered suitable for endoscopic resection, tattooing may be used if the lesion is considered difficult to detect at a subsequent endoscopy (agreement score, 4.62; degree of consensus, 100%). A tattoo should never be injected directly into or underneath a lesion that might be removed endoscopically at a later point in time (agreement score, 4.79; degree of consensus, 97%). Details of the tattoo injection should be stated clearly in the endoscopy report (agreement score, 4.76; degree of consensus, 100%). CONCLUSIONS This expert consensus has developed different statements about where tattooing should not be used, when it should be used, and how that should be done.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucía Medina-Prado
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Digestive Endoscopy, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Raf Bisschops
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sergio Alfieri
- Surgery Department, Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Pradeep Bhandari
- Department of Gastroenterology, Queen Alexandra Hospital. Portsmouth Hospital NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom
| | - Michael J Bourke
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Raquel Bravo
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Institute of Digestive and Metabolic Diseases, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas, University of Barcelona, Centro Esther Koplowitz, Cellex Biomedical Research Center, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - Marco Bustamante-Balen
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Research Group, Health Research Institute (Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe. NHS: National Health Service), Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Jason Dominitz
- Gastroenterology Department, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Monika Ferlitsch
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | - Paul Fockens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - David Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Maite Herráiz
- Departamento de Digestivo, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Charles Kahi
- Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Michal Kaminski
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Takahisa Matsuda
- Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Alan Moss
- Department of Endoscopic Services, Western Health, Melbourne Medical School Western Precinct, The University of Melbourne, St. Albans, Victoria, Australia
| | - Maria Pellisé
- Gastroenterology Department, Institute of Digestive and Metabolic Diseases, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas, University of Barcelona, Centro Esther Koplowitz, Cellex Biomedical Research Center, Barcelona, Catalonia Spain
| | - Heiko Pohl
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Colin Rees
- Department of Gastroenterology, South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, United Kingdom
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Manuel Romero-Simó
- Unidad de Coloproctología, Servicio de Cirugía General, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Matthew D Rutter
- University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton on Tees, United Kingdom; Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Prateek Sharma
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA Medical Center, University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, Kansas
| | - Aasma Shaukat
- Section of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Minneapolis VA Medical Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St. Mark's Hospital, Harrow, and Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Roland Valori
- Gloucestershire Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Kabir M, Thomas-Gibson S, Hart AL, Tozer PJ, Faiz O, Warusavitarne J, Wilson A. Management of inflammatory bowel disease associated colonic dysplasia: factors predictive of patient choice and satisfaction. Colorectal Dis 2021; 23:882-893. [PMID: 33245836 DOI: 10.1111/codi.15460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2020] [Revised: 10/07/2020] [Accepted: 11/18/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM In cases of prognostic uncertainty and equipoise as to the best management (prophylactic colectomy vs. surveillance) for dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), individualized discussion with the patient is required. Further understanding of patients' preferences is needed. METHODS A nationwide cross-sectional survey was distributed to adult IBD patients who had never been diagnosed with dysplasia (dysplasia-naïve) and those who had (dysplasia-experienced). Risk perceptions and factors that influence management choices were explored. RESULTS There were 123 respondents. A substantial proportion (29%) of the dysplasia-experienced respondents did not feel well informed about the associated cancer risk and/or its management by their clinical team. Contributing themes included contradictory advice and lack of personalized information regarding their cancer risk, alternative management options and impact on long-term quality of life. Decisional regret and health-related quality of life amongst those who chose either surveillance or surgery were comparable, but cancer-related worry scores were elevated in the surveillance group. The dysplasia-naïve respondents reported that they would only consider having a prophylactic colectomy if they had on average a 50% or even higher risk of developing cancer. On multivariable logistic regression analyses, predictors of colectomy or surveillance preference included ethnicity, personality traits such as health locus of control (whether health status is influenced by luck) and differences in perception of what a low risk of cancer is. CONCLUSIONS This study identifies predictive factors that can influence decision-making and satisfaction with the counselling process when IBD dysplasia is diagnosed. Further qualitative exploration of cultural themes would be informative.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Misha Kabir
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ailsa L Hart
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Phil J Tozer
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Omar Faiz
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Janindra Warusavitarne
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- Imperial College London, London, UK.,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ravindran S, Munday J, Veitch AM, Broughton R, Thomas-Gibson S, Penman ID, McKinlay A, Fearnhead NS, Coleman M, Logan R. Bowel cancer screening workforce survey: developing the endoscopy workforce for 2025 and beyond. Frontline Gastroenterol 2021; 13:12-19. [PMID: 34970428 PMCID: PMC8666856 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2021-101790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2021] [Revised: 02/12/2021] [Accepted: 02/14/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM The demand for bowel cancer screening (BCS) is expected to increase significantly within the next decade. Little is known about the intentions of the workforce required to meet this demand. The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG), the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) developed the first BCS workforce survey. The aim was to assess endoscopist career intentions to aid in future workforce planning to meet the anticipated increase in BCS colonoscopy. METHODS A survey was developed by JAG, BSG and ACPGBI and disseminated to consultant, clinical and trainee endoscopists between February and April 2020. Descriptive and comparative analyses were undertaken, supported with BCS data. RESULTS There were 578 respondents. Screening consultants have a median of one programmed activity (PA) per week for screening, accounting for 40% of their current endoscopy workload. 38% of current screening consultants are considering giving up colonoscopy in the next 2-5 years. Retirement (58%) and pension issues (23%) are the principle reasons for this. Consultants would increase their screening PAs by 70% if able to do so. The top three activities that endoscopists would relinquish to further support screening were outpatient clinics, acute medical/surgical on call and ward cover. An extra 155 colonoscopists would be needed to fulfil increased demand and planned retirement at current PAs. CONCLUSION This survey has identified a serious potential shortfall in screening colonoscopists in the next 5-10 years due to an ageing workforce and job plan pressures of aspirant BCS colonoscopists. We have outlined potential mitigations including reviewing job plans, improving workforce resources and supporting accreditation and training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Andrew M Veitch
- Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK,Bowel Screening Advisory Committee, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Raphael Broughton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK,Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ian D Penman
- Centre for Liver and Digestive Disorders, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK,British Society of Gastroenterology, London, UK
| | - Alistair McKinlay
- British Society of Gastroenterology, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Nicola S Fearnhead
- Colorectal Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK,Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Robert Logan
- Gastroenterology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK,NHS England and NHS Improvement London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S. Feedback interventions in colonoscopy: Good, but can we do better? Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92:1041-1043. [PMID: 33160486 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK; Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Ravindran S, Matharoo M, Shaw T, Robinson E, Choy M, Berry P, O'Donohue J, Healey CJ, Coleman M, Thomas-Gibson S. 'Case of the month': a novel way to learn from endoscopy-related patient safety incidents. Frontline Gastroenterol 2020; 12:636-643. [PMID: 34917321 PMCID: PMC8640437 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2020-101600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2020] [Revised: 08/21/2020] [Accepted: 09/11/2020] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Patient safety incidents (PSIs) are unintended or unexpected incidents which can or do lead to patient harm. The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) acknowledges that PSIs should be reviewed by endoscopy services and learning shared among staff. It is recognised that more could be done to promote shared learning as outlined by the JAG 'Improving Safety and Reducing Error in Endoscopy' strategy. The 'Case of the month' series aims to provide a broad selection of cases and subsequent learning that can be shared among services and their workforce. This review focuses on five case vignettes that highlight a variety of PSIs in endoscopy. A structured approach, based on incident analysis methodology, is applied to each case to categorise PSIs and develop learning points. Learning is directed toward the individual, team and healthcare organisation. A selection of methods to disseminate learning at local, regional and national levels are also described.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Manmeet Matharoo
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK
| | - Tim Shaw
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Emma Robinson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Matthew Choy
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Medicine, Austin Academic Centre, The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Philip Berry
- Department of Gastroenterology, Guy's and Saint Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - John O'Donohue
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Lewisham, London, London, UK
| | - Chris J Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology Services, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Ravindran S, Matharoo M, Coleman M, Marshall S, Healey C, Penman I, Thomas-Gibson S. Teamworking in endoscopy: a human factors toolkit for the COVID-19 era. Endoscopy 2020; 52:879-883. [PMID: 32572861 PMCID: PMC7516366 DOI: 10.1055/a-1204-5212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endoscopy services have had to rapidly adapt their working practices in response to COVID-19. As recovery of endoscopy services proceeds, our workforce faces numerous challenges that can impair effective teamworking. We designed and developed a novel toolkit to support teamworking in endoscopy during the pandemic. METHODS A human factors model was developed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy teams. From this, we identified a set of key teamworking goals, which informed the development of a toolkit to support several team processes. The toolkit was refined following expert input and refinement over a 6-week period. RESULTS The toolkit consists of four cognitive aids that can be used to support team huddles, briefings, and debriefs, alongside techniques to optimize endoscopic nontechnical skills across the patient-procedure pathway. We describe the processes that local endoscopy units can employ to implement this toolkit. CONCLUSION A toolkit of cognitive aids, based on human factors principles, may be useful in supporting teams, helping them adapt to working safely in the era of COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
| | - Manmeet Matharoo
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Marshall
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom
- Nurses Association Committee, British Society of Gastroenterology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Chris Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gastroenterology, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Penman
- Centre for Liver and Digestive Disorders, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
- Endoscopy Section Committee, British Society of Gastroenterology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital and Academic Institute, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Rajendran A, Pannick S, Thomas-Gibson S, Oke S, Anele C, Sevdalis N, Haycock A. Systematic literature review of learning curves for colorectal polyp resection techniques in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. Colorectal Dis 2020; 22:1085-1100. [PMID: 31925890 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14960] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2019] [Accepted: 11/26/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM The performance of therapeutic procedures in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGI) can be challenging and carries an increased risk of adverse events. There is increasing demand for the training of endoscopists in these procedures, but limited guidelines exist concerning procedural competency. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curves for LGI polypectomy, colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). METHOD A systematic review of electronic databases between 1946 and September 2019 was performed. Citations were included if they reported learning curve data. Outcome measures that defined the success of procedural competency were also recorded. RESULTS A total of 34 out of 598 studies met the inclusion criteria of which 28 were related to ESD, three to polypectomy and three to EMR. Outcome measures for polypectomy competency (en bloc resection, delayed bleeding and independent polypectomy rate) were achieved after completion of between 250 and 400 polypectomies and after 300 colonoscopies. EMR outcome measures, including complete resection and recurrence, were achieved variably between 50 and 300 procedures. Outcome measures for ESD included efficiency (resection rates and procedural speed) and safety (adverse events). En bloc resection rates of over 80% and R0 resection rates of over 70% were achieved at 20-40 cases and procedural speed increased after 30 ESD cases. Competency in safety metrics was variably achieved at 20-200 cases. CONCLUSION There is a paucity of data on learning curves in LGI polypectomy, EMR and ESD. Despite limited evidence, we have identified relevant outcome measures and threshold numbers for the most common LGI polyp resection techniques for potential inclusion in training programmes/credentialing guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Rajendran
- The Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, King's College London, London, UK.,Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, UK
| | - S Pannick
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - S Thomas-Gibson
- The Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - S Oke
- Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, UK.,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - C Anele
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - N Sevdalis
- Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, King's College London, London, UK
| | - A Haycock
- The Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Rees CJ, Trebble TM, Von Wagner C, Clapham Z, Hewitson P, Barr H, Everett S, Griffiths H, Nayar M, Oppong K, Riley S, Stebbing J, Thomas-Gibson S, Bevan R. British Society of Gastroenterology position statement on patient experience of GI endoscopy. Gut 2020; 69:1. [PMID: 31506326 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2019] [Revised: 08/26/2019] [Accepted: 08/30/2019] [Indexed: 12/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Colin J Rees
- Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, UK
| | - Tim M Trebble
- Gastroenterology, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK
| | | | - Zoe Clapham
- Endoscopy, South Tyneside General Hospital, South Shields, UK
| | - Paul Hewitson
- Health Services Research Unit, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
| | - Hugh Barr
- Oesophagogastric Surgery, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | - Simon Everett
- Gastroenterology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Manu Nayar
- HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Kofi Oppong
- HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Stuart Riley
- Department of Gastroenterology, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - John Stebbing
- General Surgery, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guilford, Surrey, UK
| | | | - Roisin Bevan
- Gastroenterology, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Stockton, Teesside, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Ravindran S, Bassett P, Shaw T, Dron M, Broughton R, Griffiths H, Keen D, Wood E, Healey CJ, Green J, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Coleman M, Thomas-Gibson S. Improving safety and reducing error in endoscopy (ISREE): a survey of UK services. Frontline Gastroenterol 2020; 12:593-600. [PMID: 34917317 PMCID: PMC8640393 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2020-101561] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2020] [Revised: 07/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/21/2020] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) 'Improving Safety and Reducing Error in Endoscopy' (ISREE) strategy was developed in 2018. In line with the strategy, a survey was conducted within the JAG census in 2019 to gain further insights and understanding of key safety-related areas within UK endoscopy. METHODS Questions were developed using the ISREE strategy as a guide and adapted by key JAG stakeholders. They were incorporated into the 2019 JAG census of UK endoscopy services. Quantitative and qualitative statistical methods were employed to analyse the results. RESULTS There was a 68% response rate. There was regional variability in the provision of out-of-hours GIB services (p<0.001). Across 1 month, 1535 incidents were reported across all services. There was a significantly higher proportion of reported incidents in acute services compared with others (p<0.001). Technical and training incidents were likely to be reported significantly differently to all other incident types. 74% of services have an endoscopy-specific sedation policy and 42% have a named sedation or anaesthetic lead for endoscopy. Services highlighted a desire for more anaesthetic-supported lists. Only 66% of services stated they have an effective strategy for supporting upskilling of endoscopists. Across acute services, 56% have access to human factors and endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) training. Patient feedback is used in several ways to improve services, develop training and promote shared learning among endoscopy users. CONCLUSIONS The census provides a benchmark for key safety-related characteristics of endoscopy services. These results have highlighted key areas to develop, guided by the ISREE strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, London, UK
| | | | - Tim Shaw
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK
| | - Michael Dron
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK
| | - Raphael Broughton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK
| | - Helen Griffiths
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Dimple Keen
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Eleanor Wood
- Gastroenterology, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK,Simulation Centre, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK
| | - Chris J Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Gastroenterology and Hepatology Services, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, West Yorkshire, UK
| | - John Green
- Gastroenterology, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust, Cardiff, Cardiff, UK
| | - Hutan Ashrafian
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, London, UK
| | - Ara Darzi
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, London, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, London, UK,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Kabir M, Fofaria R, Arebi N, Bassett P, Tozer PJ, Hart AL, Thomas-Gibson S, Humphries A, Suzuki N, Saunders B, Warusavitarne J, Faiz O, Wilson A. Systematic review with meta-analysis: IBD-associated colonic dysplasia prognosis in the videoendoscopic era (1990 to present). Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2020; 52:5-19. [PMID: 32432797 DOI: 10.1111/apt.15778] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2020] [Revised: 02/02/2020] [Accepted: 04/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The prognosis of dysplasia in patients with IBD is largely determined from observational studies from the pre-videoendoscopic era (pre-1990s) that does not reflect recent advances in endoscopic imaging and resection. AIMS To better understand the risk of synchronous colorectal cancer and metachronous advanced neoplasia (ie high-grade dysplasia or cancer) associated with dysplasia diagnosed in the videoendoscopic era, and to stratify risk according to a lesion's morphology, endoscopic resection status or whether it was incidentally detected on biopsy of macroscopically normal colonic mucosa (ie invisible). METHODS A systematic search of original articles published between 1990 and February 2020 was performed. Eligible studies reported on incidence of advanced neoplasia at follow-up colectomy or colonoscopy for IBD-dysplasia patients. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed. RESULTS Thirty-three studies were eligible for qualitative analysis (five for the meta-analysis). Pooled estimated proportions of incidental synchronous cancers found at colectomy performed for a pre-operative diagnosis of visible high-grade dysplasia, invisible high-grade dysplasia, visible low-grade dysplasia and invisible low-grade dysplasia were 13.7% (95% CI 0.0-54.1), 11.4% (95% CI 4.6-20.3), 2.7% (95% CI 0.0-7.1) and 2.4% (95% CI 0.0-8.5) respectively. The lowest incidences of metachronous advanced neoplasia, for dysplasia not managed with immediate colectomy but followed up with surveillance, tended to be reported by the studies where high definition imaging and/or chromoendoscopy was used and endoscopic resection of visible dysplasia was histologically confirmed. CONCLUSIONS The prognosis of IBD-dysplasia diagnosed in the videoendoscopic era appears to have been improved but the quality of evidence remains low. Larger, prospective studies are needed to guide management. PROSPERO registration no: CRD42019105736.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Misha Kabir
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Naila Arebi
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Phil J Tozer
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ailsa L Hart
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Adam Humphries
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Noriko Suzuki
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Brian Saunders
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Omar Faiz
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ana Wilson
- St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Ravindran S, Bassett P, Shaw T, Dron M, Broughton R, Johnston D, Healey CJ, Green J, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Coleman M, Thomas-Gibson S. National census of UK endoscopy services in 2019. Frontline Gastroenterol 2020; 12:451-460. [PMID: 34712462 PMCID: PMC8515281 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2020-101538] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Revised: 05/26/2020] [Accepted: 05/31/2020] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The 2017 Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy (JAG) census highlighted the pressure endoscopy services were under in meeting national targets and the factors behind this. In 2019, JAG conducted a further national census of endoscopy services to understand trends in activity, workforce and waiting time targets. METHODS In April 2019, the census was sent to all eligible JAG-registered services. Collated data were analysed through various statistical methods. A further comparative dataset was created using available submissions from the 2017 census matched to services in the current census. RESULTS There was a 68% response rate (322/471). There has been a 12%-15% increase in activity across all GI procedures with largest increases in bowel cancer screening. Fewer services are meeting waiting time targets compared with 2017, with endoscopist, nursing and physical capacity cited as the main reasons. Services are striving to improve capacity: 80% of services have an agreed business plan to meet capacity and the number using insourcing has increased from 13% to 20%. The workforce has increased, with endoscopist numbers increasing by 15%, nurses and allied health professionals by 14% and clerical staff by 30%. CONCLUSIONS The 2019 JAG census is the most recent and extensive survey of UK endoscopy services. There is a clear trend of increasing activity with fewer services able to meet national waiting time targets than 2 years ago. Services have increased their workforce and improved planning to stem the tide but there remains a continued pressure to deliver high quality, safe endoscopy. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, JAG recognises that these pressures will be severely exacerbated and waiting time targets for accreditation will need adjustment and tolerance during the evolution and recovery from the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Tim Shaw
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Michael Dron
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Raphael Broughton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Debbie Johnston
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Chris J Healey
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Gastroenterology and Hepatology Services, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, UK
| | - John Green
- Gastroenterology, Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - Ara Darzi
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Mark Coleman
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK,Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Mark’s Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Thomas-Gibson S, Choy M, Dhillon AS. How to approach endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Frontline Gastroenterol 2020; 12:508-514. [PMID: 34712469 PMCID: PMC8515477 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2019-101357] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2019] [Revised: 04/22/2020] [Accepted: 05/04/2020] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Matthew Choy
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, London, UK,Department of Medicine, Austin Academic Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Choy MC, Matharoo M, Thomas-Gibson S. Diagnostic ileocolonoscopy: getting the basics right. Frontline Gastroenterol 2020; 11:484-490. [PMID: 33101627 PMCID: PMC7569527 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2019-101266] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2019] [Revised: 02/15/2020] [Accepted: 02/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Proficient colonoscopy technique that optimises patient comfort while simultaneously enhancing the timely detection of pathology and subsequent therapy is an aspirational and achievable goal for every endoscopist. This article aims to provide strategies to improve colonoscopy quality for both endoscopists and patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew C Choy
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Marks Hospital, Harrow, UK,Department of Medicine, Austin Academic Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Marks Hospital, Harrow, UK,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Ravindran S, Haycock A, Woolf K, Thomas-Gibson S. Development and impact of an endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) behavioural marker system. BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn 2020; 7:17-25. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjstel-2019-000526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BackgroundNon-technical skills (NTS) are crucial to effective team working in endoscopy. Training in NTS has been shown to improve team performance and patient outcomes. As such, NTS training and assessment are now considered essential components of the endoscopy quality assurance process. Across the literature, other specialties have achieved this through development of behavioural marker systems (BMS). BMS provide a framework for assessing, training and measuring the NTS relevant to healthcare individuals and team. This article describes the development and impact of a novel BMS for endoscopy: the endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) system.MethodsThe initial NTS taxonomy for endoscopy was created through a combination of literature review, staff focus groups and semi-structured interviews, incorporating the critical decision method. Framework analysis was conducted with three individual coders and generated a skills list which formed the preliminary taxonomy. Video observation of Bowel Cancer Screening endoscopists was used to identify exemplar behaviours which were mapped to relevant skills in the NTS taxonomy. Behavioural descriptors, derived from video data, were added to form the basis of the ENTS system.ResultsA taxonomy of 33 skills in 14 separate categories were identified through framework analysis. Following video analysis and behaviour mapping, 4 overarching categories and 13 behavioural elements were identified which formed the ENTS framework. The endoscopy (directly observed procedural skills) 4-point rating scale was added to create the final ENTS system. Since its development in 2010, the ENTS system has been validated in the assessment of endoscopy for trainees nationally. ENTS informs a number of training initiatives, including a national strategy to improve NTS for all endoscopists.ConclusionsThe ENTS system is a clinically relevant tool, validated for use in trainee assessment. The use of ENTS will be important to the future of training and quality assurance in endoscopy.
Collapse
|
38
|
Rutter MD, East J, Rees CJ, Cripps N, Docherty J, Dolwani S, Kaye PV, Monahan KJ, Novelli MR, Plumb A, Saunders BP, Thomas-Gibson S, Tolan DJM, Whyte S, Bonnington S, Scope A, Wong R, Hibbert B, Marsh J, Moores B, Cross A, Sharp L. British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines. Gut 2020; 69:201-223. [PMID: 31776230 PMCID: PMC6984062 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319858] [Citation(s) in RCA: 193] [Impact Index Per Article: 48.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 10/15/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew D Rutter
- Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, UK
- Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - James East
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Colin J Rees
- Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Gastroenterology, South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, UK
| | - Neil Cripps
- Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Chichester, UK
| | | | - Sunil Dolwani
- Gastroenterology, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust, Cardiff, UK
| | - Philip V Kaye
- Histopathology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Kevin J Monahan
- Family History of Bowel Cancer Clinic, West Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial College, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Damian J M Tolan
- Clinical Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Sophie Whyte
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Alison Scope
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Ruth Wong
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | | | | | - Amanda Cross
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine of Imperial College, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Linda Sharp
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S. Ring-fitted caps: A welcome addition to the endoscopist's tool belt? Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:121-123. [PMID: 31865986 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.08.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2019] [Accepted: 08/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Healey CJ, Thomas-Gibson S. Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: patients can be reassured that UK endoscopy is already engaged in quality assessment and continual improvement. BMJ 2019; 367:l6910. [PMID: 31822486 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l6910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J Healey
- Endoscopy Services Quality Assurance Group, Royal College of Physicians, London NW1 4LE, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London NW1 4LE, UK
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Siau K, Murugananthan A, Dunckley P, Smith GV, Thomas-Gibson S. National survey of UK endoscopists showing variation in diathermy practice for colonic polypectomy: a JAG perspective. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10:444-445. [PMID: 31656575 PMCID: PMC6788133 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101133] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2018] [Revised: 12/26/2018] [Accepted: 12/27/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Keith Siau
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK,College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK,Endoscopy Unit, Dudley Group Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK
| | - Aravinth Murugananthan
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Paul Dunckley
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Gloucester, Gloucestershire, UK
| | - Geoffrey V Smith
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK,Department of Gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK,Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Marks Hospital, Harrow, UK,Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Currie AC, Blazeby JM, Suzuki N, Thomas-Gibson S, Reeves B, Morton D, Kennedy RH. Evaluation of an early-stage innovation for full-thickness excision of benign colonic polyps using the IDEAL framework. Colorectal Dis 2019; 21:1004-1016. [PMID: 30993857 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14650] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2019] [Accepted: 04/02/2019] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
AIMS Colectomy is the current approach for patients with endoscopically unresectable benign polyps but risks considerable morbidity. Full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision (FLEX) is a novel procedure, specifically developed to treat endoscopically unresectable benign colonic polyps, which could reduce the treatment burden of the current approach and improve outcomes. However, traditional evaluations of surgical innovations lack methodological rigour. This study reports the development and feasibility of the FLEX procedure in selected patients. METHOD A prospective development study using the Idea, Development, Evaluation, Assessment, Long-term study (IDEAL) framework was undertaken, by one surgeon, of the FLEX procedure in selected patients with endoscopically unresectable benign colonic polyps. Three-dimensional (3D)-CT colonography reconstructions were used preoperatively to rehearse patient-specific, critical manoeuvres. Targetted, full-thickness excision was performed: after marking the margin of the caecal polyp using circumferential endoscopic argon plasma coagulation, transmural endoscopic sutures were used to evert the bowel and resection was undertaken by laparoscopic linear stapling. Feasibility outcomes (establishing 'local success') included evidence of complete polyp resection without adverse events (especially safe closure of the excision site). RESULTS Ten patients [median (interquartile range) age: 74 (59-78) years] with polyp median diameters of 35 (30-41) mm, were referred for and consented to receive the FLEX procedure. During the same time frame, no patient underwent colectomy for benign polyps. One further patient received FLEX for local excision of a presumed malignant polyp because severe comorbidity prohibited standard procedures. The FLEX procedure was successfully performed locally, with complete resection of the polyp and safe closure of the excision site, in eight patients. Three noncompleted procedures were converted to laparoscopic segmental colectomy under the same anaesthetic because of endoscopic inaccessibility (two patients) and transcolonic suture failure (one patient). CONCLUSIONS The FLEX procedure is still under development. Early data demonstrate that it is safe for excision of selected benign polyps. Modifications to transcolonic suture delivery are now required and there is a need for wider adoption before more definitive evaluation can be performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A C Currie
- Department of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex, UK
| | - J M Blazeby
- Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.,Division of Surgery, Head & Neck, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - N Suzuki
- Wolfson Department of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex, UK
| | - S Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Department of Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex, UK
| | - B Reeves
- Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - D Morton
- Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, UK
| | - R H Kennedy
- Department of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex, UK.,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Dhillon AS, Ibraheim H, Green S, Suzuki N, Thomas-Gibson S, Wilson A. Curriculum review: serrated lesions of the colorectum. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 11:243-248. [PMID: 32419916 PMCID: PMC7223468 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2018] [Revised: 05/02/2019] [Accepted: 05/23/2019] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of death from cancer in the UK. Sporadic CRC evolves by the cumulative effect of genetic and epigenetic alterations. Typically, over the course of several years, this leads to the transformation of normal colonic epithelium to benign adenomatous polyp, low-grade to high-grade dysplasia and finally cancer-the adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Over the last decade, the serrated neoplasia pathway which progresses by methylation of tumour suppressing genes has been increasingly recognised as an important alternative pathway accounting for up to 30% of CRC cases. Endoscopists should be aware of the unique features of serrated lesions so that their early detection, appropriate resection and surveillance interval can be optimised.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hajir Ibraheim
- Guy's and Saint Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Susi Green
- Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK
| | - Noriko Suzuki
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | | | - Ana Wilson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Affiliation(s)
- Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- The Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St. Mark's Hospital, London, Untied Kingdom; Imperial College, London, Untied Kingdom
| | - Manmeet Matharoo
- The Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St. Mark's Hospital, London, Untied Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Siau K, Anderson JT, Valori R, Feeney M, Hawkes ND, Johnson G, McKaig BC, Pullan RD, Hodson J, Wells C, Thomas-Gibson S, Haycock AV, Beales IL, Broughton R, Dunckley P. Certification of UK gastrointestinal endoscopists and variations between trainee specialties: results from the JETS e-portfolio. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7:E551-E560. [PMID: 30957005 PMCID: PMC6449159 DOI: 10.1055/a-0839-4476] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction In the UK, endoscopy certification is administered by the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Since 2011, certification for upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy has been awarded via a national (JETS) e-portfolio to the main training specialties of: gastroenterology, gastrointestinal surgeons (GS) and non-medical endoscopists (NME). Trends in endoscopy certification and differences between trainee specialties were analyzed. Methods This prospective UK-wide observational study identified trainees awarded gastroscopy, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy (provisional and full) certification between June 2011 - 2017. Trends in certification, procedures and time-to-certification, and key performance indicators (KPIs) in the 3-month pre- and post-certification period were compared between the three main training specialties. Results Three thousand one hundred fifty-seven endoscopy-related certifications were awarded to 1928 trainees from gastroenterology (52.3 %), GS (28.4 %) and NME (16.5 %) specialties. During the study period, certification numbers increased for all modalities and specialties, particularly NME trainees. For gastroscopy and colonoscopy, procedures-to-certification were lowest for GS ( P < 0.001), whereas time-to-certification was consistently shortest in NMEs ( P < 0.001). A post-certification reduction in mean cecal intubation rate (95.2 % to 93.8 %, P < 0.001) was observed in colonoscopy, and D2 intubation (97.6 % to 96.2 %, P < 0.001) and J-maneuver (97.3 % to 95.8 %, P < 0.001) in gastroscopy. Overall, average pre- and post-certification KPIs still exceeded national minimum standards. There was an increase in PDR for NMEs after provisional colonoscopy certification but a decrease in PDR for GS trainees after sigmoidoscopy and full colonoscopy certification. Conclusion Despite variations among trainee specialties, average pre- and post-certification KPIs for certified trainees met national standards, suggesting that JAG certification is a transparent benchmark which adequately safeguards competency in endoscopy training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith Siau
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Endoscopy, Dudley Group Hospitals NHSFT, Dudley, UK
- Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - John T. Anderson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHSFT, Gloucester, UK
| | - Roland Valori
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHSFT, Gloucester, UK
| | - Mark Feeney
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK
| | - Neil D. Hawkes
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Cwm Taf University Health Board, Llantrisant, UK
| | - Gavin Johnson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospitals NHSFT, London, UK
| | - Brian C. McKaig
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Rupert D. Pullan
- General and Colorectal Surgery, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK
| | - James Hodson
- Institute of Translational Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Christopher Wells
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Stockton on Tees, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Adam V. Haycock
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ian L.P. Beales
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - Raphael Broughton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Paul Dunckley
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHSFT, Gloucester, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Murray S, Wood E. Improving safety and reducing error in endoscopy: simulation training in human factors. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10:160-166. [PMID: 31205657 PMCID: PMC6540271 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2018] [Revised: 12/10/2018] [Accepted: 12/16/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Patient safety incidents occur throughout healthcare and early reports have exposed how deficiencies in 'human factors' have contributed to mortality in endoscopy. Recognising this, in the UK, the Joint Advisory Group for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy have implemented a number of initiatives including the 'Improving Safety and Reducing Error in Endoscopy' (ISREE) strategy. Within this, simulation training in human factors and Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills (ENTS) is being developed. Across healthcare, simulation training has been shown to improve team skills and patient outcomes. Although the literature is sparse, integrated and in situ simulation modalities have shown promise in endoscopy. Outcomes demonstrate improved individual and team performance and development of skills that aid clinical practice. Additionally, the use of simulation training to detect latent errors in the working environment is of significant value in reducing error and preventing harm. Implementation of simulation training at local and regional levels can be successfully achieved with collaboration between organisational, educational and clinical leads. Nationally, simulation strategies are a key aspect of the ISREE strategy to improve ENTS training. These may include integration of simulation into current training or development of novel simulation-based curricula. However used, it is evident that simulation training is an important tool in developing safer endoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsan Ravindran
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital, London, UK,Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Sam Murray
- Department of Gastroenterology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Eleanor Wood
- Department of Gastroenterology, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK,Simulation Centre, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Sidhu R, Turnbull D, Newton M, Thomas-Gibson S, Sanders DS, Hebbar S, Haidry RJ, Smith G, Webster G. Deep sedation and anaesthesia in complex gastrointestinal endoscopy: a joint position statement endorsed by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Advisory Group (JAG) and Royal College of Anaesthetists (RCoA). Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10:141-147. [PMID: 31205654 PMCID: PMC6540268 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2018] [Revised: 12/05/2018] [Accepted: 12/16/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
In the UK, more than 2.5 million endoscopic procedures are carried out each year. Most are performed under conscious sedation with benzodiazepines and opioids administered by the endoscopist. However, in prolonged and complex procedures, this form of sedation may provide inadequate patient comfort or result in oversedation. As a result, this may have a negative impact on procedural success and patient outcome. In addition, there have been safety concerns on the high doses of benzodiazepines and opioids used particularly in prolonged and complex procedures such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy has evolved rapidly over the past 5 years with advances in technical skills and equipment allowing interventions and procedural capabilities that are moving closer to minimally invasive endoscopic surgery. It is vital that safe and appropriate sedation practices follow the inevitable expansion of this portfolio to accommodate safe and high-quality clinical outcomes. This position statement outlines the current use of sedation in the UK and highlights the role for anaesthetist-led deep sedation practice with a focus on propofol sedation although the choice of sedative or anaesthetic agent is ultimately the choice of the anaesthetist. It outlines the indication for deep sedation and anaesthesia, patient selection and assessment and procedural details. It considers the setup for a deep sedation and anaesthesia list, including the equipment required, the environment, staffing and monitoring requirements. Considerations for different endoscopic procedures in both emergency and elective setting are also detailed. The role for training, audit, compliance and future developments are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reena Sidhu
- Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - David Turnbull
- Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Mary Newton
- Department of Anaesthesia, The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Imperial College, Chair Joint Advisory Group Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, St Mark’s Hospital, Harrow, UK
| | - David S Sanders
- Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Srisha Hebbar
- Department of Gastroenterology, Stoke University Hospital University, Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Rehan J Haidry
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK,Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London (UCL), London, UK
| | - Geoff Smith
- Gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - George Webster
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Siau K, Green JT, Hawkes ND, Broughton R, Feeney M, Dunckley P, Barton JR, Stebbing J, Thomas-Gibson S. Impact of the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) on endoscopy services in the UK and beyond. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10:93-106. [PMID: 31210174 PMCID: PMC6540274 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-100969] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2018] [Revised: 09/18/2018] [Accepted: 09/24/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) was initially established in 1994 to standardise endoscopy training across specialties. Over the last two decades, the position of JAG has evolved to meet its current role of quality assuring all aspects of endoscopy in the UK to provide the highest quality, patient-centred care. Drivers such as changes to healthcare agenda, national audits, advances in research and technology and the advent of population-based cancer screening have underpinned this shift in priority. Over this period, JAG has spearheaded various quality assurance initiatives with support from national stakeholders. These have led to the achievement of notable milestones in endoscopy quality assurance, particularly in the three major areas of: (1) endoscopy training, (2) accreditation of endoscopy services (including the Global Rating Scale), and (3) accreditation of screening endoscopists. These developments have changed the landscape of UK practice, serving as a model to promote excellence in endoscopy. This review provides a summary of JAG initiatives and assesses the impact of JAG on training and endoscopy services within the UK and beyond.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith Siau
- Endoscopy Unit, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - John T Green
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK
| | - Neil D Hawkes
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Cwm Taf University Health Board, Llantrisant, UK
| | - Raphael Broughton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
| | - Mark Feeney
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, South Devon Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK
| | - Paul Dunckley
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Gloucester, UK
| | - John Roger Barton
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Newcastle University Medicine Malaysia, Nusajaya, Johor, Malaysia
| | - John Stebbing
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Department of GI Surgery, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Siwan Thomas-Gibson
- Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK
- Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Marks Hospital, Harrow, UK
- Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Siau K, Green J, Hawkes N, Broughton R, Feeney M, Dunckley P, Barton J, Stebbing J, Thomas-Gibson S. Review of the impact of the Joint Advisory Group on gastrointestinal endoscopy (JAG) on accreditation services and training. Clin Med (Lond) 2019. [DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.19-2-s80] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
50
|
Choi CHR, Al Bakir I, Ding NSJ, Lee GH, Askari A, Warusavitarne J, Moorghen M, Humphries A, Ignjatovic-Wilson A, Thomas-Gibson S, Saunders BP, Rutter MD, Graham TA, Hart AL. Cumulative burden of inflammation predicts colorectal neoplasia risk in ulcerative colitis: a large single-centre study. Gut 2019; 68:414-422. [PMID: 29150489 PMCID: PMC6581019 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314190] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2017] [Revised: 09/20/2017] [Accepted: 10/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a dynamic disease with its severity continuously changing over time. We hypothesised that the risk of colorectal neoplasia (CRN) in UC closely follows an actuarial accumulative inflammatory burden, which is inadequately represented by current risk stratification strategies. DESIGN This was a retrospective single-centre study. Patients with extensive UC who were under colonoscopic surveillance between 2003 and 2012 were studied. Each surveillance episode was scored for a severity of microscopic inflammation (0=no activity; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe activity). The cumulative inflammatory burden (CIB) was defined as sum of: average score between each pair of surveillance episodes multiplied by the surveillance interval in years. Potential predictors were correlated with CRN outcome using time-dependent Cox regression. RESULTS A total of 987 patients were followed for a median of 13 years (IQR, 9-18), 97 (9.8%) of whom developed CRN. Multivariate analysis showed that the CIB was significantly associated with CRN development (HR, 2.1 per 10-unit increase in CIB (equivalent of 10, 5 or 3.3 years of continuous mild, moderate or severe active microscopic inflammation); 95% CI 1.4 to 3.0; P<0.001). Reflecting this, while inflammation severity based on the most recent colonoscopy alone was not significant (HR, 0.9 per-1-unit increase in severity; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.2; P=0.5), a mean severity score calculated from all colonoscopies performed in preceding 5 years was significantly associated with CRN risk (HR, 2.2 per-1-unit increase; 95% CI 1.6 to 3.1; P<0.001). CONCLUSION The risk of CRN in UC is significantly associated with accumulative inflammatory burden. An accurate CRN risk stratification should involve assessment of multiple surveillance episodes to take this into account.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang-Ho Ryan Choi
- St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ibrahim Al Bakir
- St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Matthew D Rutter
- Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, UK
| | - Trevor A Graham
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|