Evaluating Disparities in Colon Cancer Survival in American Indian/Alaskan Native Patients Using the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Studies demonstrate higher mortality rates from colon cancer in American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) patients compared to non-Hispanic White (nHW). We aim to identify factors that contribute to survival disparities.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to identify AI/AN (n = 2127) and nHW (n = 527,045) patients with stage I-IV colon cancer from 2004 to 2016. Overall survival among stage I-IV colon cancer patients was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to identify independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

AI/AN patients with stage I-III disease had significantly shorter median survival than nHW (73 vs 77 months, respectively; p < 0.001); there were no differences in survival for stage IV. Adjusted analyses demonstrated that AI/AN race was an independent predictor of higher overall mortality compared to nHW (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.33, p = 0.002). Importantly, compared to nHW, AI/AN were younger, had more comorbidities, had greater rurality, had more left-sided colon cancers, had higher stage but lower grade tumors, were less frequently treated at an academic facility, were more likely to experience a delay in initiation of chemotherapy, and were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III disease. We found no differences in sex, receipt of surgery, or adequacy of lymph node dissection.

CONCLUSION

We found patient, tumor, and treatment factors that potentially contribute to worse survival rates observed in AI/AN colon cancer patients. Limitations include the heterogeneity of AI/AN patients and the use of overall survival as an endpoint. Additional studies are needed to implement strategies to eliminate disparities.

Interventions to improve the performance of upper GI endoscopy quality indicators

The promotion of quality and best practices in gastroenterology and endoscopy is an ongoing effort. For upper GI endoscopy, quality indicators derived from clinical studies and expert consensus have been long established but remain variably obtained. To date, data on interventions aimed to improve these indicators are scarce. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify interventions and measures demonstrated to improve the performance of previously established upper endoscopy quality indicators. We also identified evidence gaps and opportunities for improvement in this area.

Gastroenterologist and primary care perspectives on a post-endoscopy discharge policy: impact on clinic wait times, provider satisfaction and provider workload

Background

To reduce unnecessary ambulatory gastroenterology (GI) visits and increase access to GI care, San Francisco Health Network gastroenterologists and primary care providers implemented guidelines in 2013 that discharged certain patients back to primary care after endoscopy with formal written recommendations. This study assesses the longer-term impact of this policy on GI clinic access, workflow, and provider satisfaction.

Methods

An email-based survey assessed gastroenterologist and primary care provider (PCP) opinions about the discharge process. Administrative data and chart review were used to assess clinic access, intervention fidelity, and re-referral rates.

Results

102/299 (34%) of PCPs and 5/7 (71%) of gastroenterologists responded to the survey. 74% of PCPs and 100% of gastroenterologists were satisfied or very satisfied with the discharge process. 80% of gastroenterologists believed the discharge process decreased their workload, while 53.5% of primary care providers believed it increased their workload. 6.7% of patients discharged to primary care in 2013 had re-referrals to GI. Wait time for the third-next-available new outpatient GI clinic appointment had previously decreased from 158 days (2012, pre-intervention) to 74 days (2013, post-intervention). In 2015, wait time was 19 days (p < 0.001 for 2012 vs. 2015).

Conclusions

Primary care providers and gastroenterologists are satisfied with an intervention to discharge patients from gastroenterology to primary care after certain endoscopic procedures, although this conclusion is limited by a relatively low PCP survey response rate. Discharging appropriate patients using consensus criteria from the gastroenterology clinic was instrumental in sustainably reducing clinic wait times with low re-referral rates.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-017-2819-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Assessment of quality indicators among nurse practitioners performing upper endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Limited international data have shown that non-physicians can safely perform upper endoscopy, but no such study has been performed in the United States. Our aim was to assess the quality of outpatient upper endoscopies performed by nurse practitioners (NPs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Retrospective chart review of upper endoscopies performed by 3 NPs between 2010 and 2013 was performed. Comparisons among all NPs performing upper endoscopy and assessment of individual NP performance over time with respect to quality indicators were performed.

RESULTS

Three NPs performed 333 upper endoscopies (distribution of 166, 44, and 123, respectively). Of the cases, 98.2 %s were successfully completed to the second portion of the duodenum. In most cases, photo-documentation of required anatomical landmarks was performed: GE junction (84.2 %), GE junction in retroflexed view (84.2 %), antrum (82.1 %) and duodenum (80.9 %). Photo-documentation improved with increasing experience. NPs appropriately performed biopsies for specific medical conditions: 10/11 (90.9 %) gastric ulcers were biopsied and 63/66 (95.5) of patients with iron deficiency had duodenal biopsies performed for celiac disease. A physician endoscopist was required during the procedure 22.5 % of the time. Important parameters such as documenting informed consent (100 %) and documenting a discharge plan (99.4 %) in the procedure reports were overwhelming present. There was a single adverse event during the study period.

CONCLUSION

 In the first US study of NPs performing upper endoscopy, they were able to perform high-quality and safe upper endoscopies. These findings support incorporation of non-physicians alongside physicians to help meet the growing demand for endoscopic services across the United States.

Urgent colonoscopy in patients with lower GI bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lower GI bleeding (LGIB) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Colonoscopy is indicated in all hospitalized patients with LGIB, yet the time frame for performing colonoscopy remains unclear. Prior studies of outcomes in urgent versus elective colonoscopy have yielded conflicting results and were often underpowered. Our study objective was to compare several outcomes between urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients hospitalized for LGIB.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on studies that compared urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients with LGIB. Pooled rates were calculated for specific outcomes, and rate ratios were determined for selected comparison groups.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, with a total sample size of 10,172 patients in the urgent colonoscopy arm and 14,224 patients in the elective colonoscopy arm. Urgent colonoscopy was associated with increased use of endoscopic therapeutic intervention (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.67). There were no significant differences in bleeding source localization (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, .92-1.25), adverse event rates (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, .65-1.71), rebleeding rates (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, .74-1.78), transfusion requirement (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .73-1.41), or mortality (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, .45-3.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent colonoscopy appears to be safe and well tolerated, but there is no clear evidence that it alters important clinical outcomes.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary access versus precut papillotomy in patients with failed biliary cannulation: a retrospective study

Background and aims Precut papillotomy is widely used after failed biliary cannulation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary access techniques are newer methods to facilitate access and therapy in failed cannulation. We evaluated the impact of EUS-guided biliary access on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) success and compared these techniques to precut papillotomy. Patients and methods We retrospectively compared two ERCP cohorts. One cohort consisted of biliary ERCPs (n = 1053) attempted in patients with native papillae and surgically unaltered anatomy in whom precut papillotomy and/or EUS-guided biliary access were routinely performed immediately after failed cannulation. This cohort was compared with a similar ERCP cohort (n = 1062) in which only precut papillotomy was available for failed cannulation. The following outcomes were compared: conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access techniques (precut or EUS), precut success, EUS-guided biliary access success, and ERCP failure rates. Results Although conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access technique (precut or EUS), and precut success were similar, the ERCP failure rate was lower when both EUS-guided biliary access and precut were available (1.0 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.4 - 1.6]), compared with when only precut was possible for failed access (3.6 % [95 %CI 2.5 - 4.7]; P < 0.001). Success for EUS-guided biliary access (95.1 % [95 %CI 89.7 - 100]) was significantly higher than for precut (75.3 % [95 %CI 68.2 - 82.4]; P < 0.001), and mainly due to superiority in malignant obstruction (93.5 % vs. 64 %; P < 0.001). Conclusions EUS-guided biliary access decreases the rate of therapeutic biliary ERCP failure. Our results support the use of EUS-guided biliary access to optimize single-session ERCP success. In experienced hands, these techniques appear as effective, if not more so, than precut papillotomy.

Inadequate Utilization of Diagnostic Colonoscopy Following Abnormal FIT Results in an Integrated Safety-Net System

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is contingent on colonoscopy completion in patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Understanding system and patient factors affecting follow-up of abnormal screening tests is essential to optimize care for high-risk cohorts.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in an integrated safety-net system comprised of 11 primary-care clinics and one Gastroenterology referral unit and included patients 50-75 years, with a positive FIT between April 2012 and February 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 2,238 patients identified, 1,245 (55.6%) completed their colonoscopy within 1-year of the positive FIT. The median time from positive FIT to colonoscopy was 184 days (interquartile range 140-232). Of the 13% of FIT positive patients not referred to gastroenterology, 49% lacked documentation addressing their abnormal result or counseling on the increased risk of CRC. Of the patients referred but who missed their appointments, 62% lacked documentation following up on the abnormal result in the absence of a completed colonoscopy. FIT positive patients never referred to gastroenterology or who missed their appointment after referrals were more likely to have comorbid conditions and documented illicit substance use compared with patients who completed a colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite access to colonoscopy and a shared electronic health record system, colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT is inadequate within this safety-net system. Inadequate follow-up is in part explained by inappropriate screening, but there is an absence of clear documentation and systematic workflow within both primary care and GI specialty care addressing abnormal FIT results.

Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in the elderly: updates and controversies

Colorectal cancer is common worldwide, and the elderly are disproportionately affected. Increasing age is a risk factor for the development of precancerous adenomas and colorectal cancer, thus raising the issue of screening and surveillance in older patients. Elderly patients are a diverse and heterogeneous group, and special considerations such as comorbid medical conditions, functional status and cognitive ability play a role in deciding on the utility of screening and surveillance. Colorectal cancer screening can be beneficial to patients, but at certain ages and under some circumstances the harm of screening outweighs the benefits. Increasing adverse events, poorer bowel preparation and more incomplete examinations are observed in older patients undergoing colonoscopy for diagnostic, screening and surveillance purposes. Decisions regarding screening, surveillance and treatment for colorectal cancer require a multidisciplinary approach that accounts not only for the patient’s age but also for their overall health, preferences and functional status. This review provides an update and examines the challenges surrounding colorectal cancer diagnosis, screening, and treatment in the elderly.

Prevalence and predictors of patient no-shows to outpatient endoscopic procedures scheduled with anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Demand for endoscopic procedures scheduled with anesthesia is increasing and no-show to appointments carries significant patient health and financial impact, yet little is known about predictors of no-show.

METHODS

We performed a 16-month retrospective observational cohort study of patients scheduled for outpatient endoscopy with anesthesia at a county hospital serving the safety-net healthcare system of San Francisco. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations between attendance and predictors of no-show.

RESULTS

In total, 511 patients underwent endoscopy with anesthesia during the study period. Twenty-seven percent of patients failed to attend an appointment and were considered "no-show". In multivariate analysis, higher no-show rates were associated with patients with a prior history of no-show (odds ratio [OR] 6.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4- 17.5), those with active substance abuse within the past year (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.4-3.6), those with heavy prescription opioids/benzodiazepines use (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.0-2.6) and longer wait-times (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.00-1.09). Inversely associated with patient no-show were active employment (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.81), patients who attended a pre-operative appointment with an anesthesiologist (OR 0.52; CI 0.32-0.85), and those undergoing an advanced endoscopic procedure (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.19-0.94).

CONCLUSION

In a safety-net healthcare population, behavioral and social determinants of health, including missed appointments, active substance abuse, homelessness, and unemployment are associated with no-shows to endoscopy with anesthesia.

Preconsultation exchange in the United States: use, awareness, and attitudes

OBJECTIVES

Demand for specialty care exceeds supply in many healthcare systems in the United States. Preconsultation exchange has the potential to increase access to specialty care, and increase its timeliness and efficiency, by triaging need and urgency and streamlining the previsit workup. We sought to characterize attitudes toward, use of, and concerns regarding preconsultation exchange among US internists.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

We administered a Web-based survey to a large national panel of US internists maintained by the American College of Physicians.

RESULTS

Response rate was 55% (N=451) with minimal differences between responders and nonresponders. Of responders, only 13% were initially familiar with the term "preconsultation exchange," but once defined, 28% were classified as frequent users, 40% as occasional users, and 32% as rare/never users. Internists used preconsultation exchange to: guide the prespecialty visit workup (78%), answer clinical questions without a patient visit to the specialist (71%), triage referral urgency (67%), and transfer referrals to a more appropriate specialty (47%). Responders supported multiple benefits of preconsultation exchange, but also reported concerns regarding reimbursement, liability, physicians taking personal responsibility for patient care, and inadequate exchange of clinical information. Compared with primary care physicians, specialists recognized more benefits of preconsultation exchange, but also expressed more concerns. The majority of responders reported increased willingness to use preconsultation exchange if specific remedies were applied.

CONCLUSIONS

Most US internists participate in preconsultation exchange and agree with its potential benefits. However, important concerns and barriers exist. Methods to reduce barriers to preconsultation exchange should be identified.

Colorectal cancer of the elderly

OPINION STATEMENT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) disproportionately affects the elderly. Older age is a strong risk factor for both the development of precancerous adenomas and CRC, thus raising the issue of screening and surveillance in older patients. However, screening and surveillance decisions in the elderly can be complex and challenging. Elderly patients are a diverse and heterogeneous group and special considerations such as co-morbid medical conditions, functional status, and cognitive ability play a role in one's decisions regarding the utility of screening and surveillance. Such considerations also play a role in factors related to screening modalities, such as colonoscopy, as well as CRC treatment options and regimens. This review addresses many of the unique factors associated with CRC of the elderly and critically examines many of the controversies and challenges surrounding CRC in older patients.

Assessment of delivery methods used in the informed consent process at a safety-net hospital

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is legally and ethically required before a patient undergoes an endoscopic procedure, yet current literature suggests that patient comprehension of key components of informed consent is poor.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate specific aspects of and patient satisfaction with the informed consent process in patients who attended an endoscopy education class versus gastroenterology clinic.

DESIGN

Prospective survey that examined all components of the informed consent process.

SETTING

Safety-net hospital.

PATIENTS

Outpatients undergoing endoscopy.

INTERVENTION

Endoscopy education class versus gastroenterology clinic.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Patient recall of the components of and satisfaction with the informed consent process.

RESULTS

A total of 301 patients completed the survey, 52.0% of whom attended and were consented in an endoscopy education class. Patients who attended an endoscopy education class reported that a greater number of individual components of the informed consent process were explained to them as compared with patients who were consented in clinic. In multivariate analysis, patients who attended an education class were more likely to recall having had the alternatives (odds ratio [OR] 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-11.8), details of the procedure (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.3-6.8), and what to expect after the procedure (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-5.6) explained to them by a provider. These patients were more likely to know they could refuse the procedure (OR 4.1; 95% CI, 1.0-16.8), compared with patients consented in the gastroenterology clinic.

LIMITATIONS

Non-randomized trial.

CONCLUSION

Patients from a diverse, urban population who attended a multilingual endoscopy education class reported having more elements of the informed consent process explained to them compared with patients who were consented in gastroenterology clinic.

Non-physician performance of lower and upper endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Demand for endoscopic procedures worldwide has increased while the number of physicians trained to perform endoscopy has remained relatively constant. The objective of this study was to characterize non-physician performance of lower and upper endoscopic procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Bibliographical searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies were included where patients underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or upper endoscopy done by a non-physician (nurse, nurse practitioner, physician assistant) and outcome measures were reported (detection of polyps, adenomas, cancer, and/or adverse events). Pooled rates were calculated for specific outcomes and rate ratios were determined for selected comparison groups.

RESULTS

Most studies involved nurses performing flexible sigmoidoscopies for colorectal cancer screening. Nurses and nurse-practitioners/physician assistants performing flexible sigmoidoscopies showed pooled polyp detection rates of 9.9 % and 23.7 %, adenoma detection rates of 2.9 % and 7.2 %, colorectal cancer detection rates of 1.3 % and 1.2 %, and adverse event rates of 0.3 and 0 per 1000 sigmoidoscopies, respectively. There was no significant difference between polyp and adenoma detection rates in sigmoidoscopy performance studies comparing nurses or nurse-practitioners/physician assistants with physicians. For the 3 studies of non-physician performance of colonoscopy, pooled adenoma detection rate was 26.4 %, cecal intubation rate was 93.5 %, and adverse event rate was 2.2 /1000 colonoscopies. In the few studies examining upper endoscopies, 99.4 % of upper endoscopy procedures performed by nurses were successful with no reported adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Available studies suggest that when non-physicians perform endoscopic procedures, especially lower endoscopies, outcomes and adverse events are in line with those of physicians.

Guidelines for safety in the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit

Historically, safety in the gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy unit has focused on infection control, particularly around the reprocessing of endoscopes. Two highly publicized outbreaks where the transmission of infectious agents were related to GI endoscopy have highlighted the need to address potential gaps along the endoscopy care continuum that could impact patient safety.

Adverse events in older patients undergoing ERCP: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Biliary and pancreatic diseases are common in the elderly; however, few studies have addressed the occurrence of adverse events in elderly patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Our objective was to determine the incidence rates of specific adverse events in this group and calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for selected comparison groups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Bibliographical searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. The studies included documented the incidence of adverse events (perforation, pancreatitis, bleeding, cholangitis, cardiopulmonary adverse events, mortality) in patients aged ≥ 65 who underwent ERCP. Pooled incidence rates were calculated for each reported adverse event and IRRs were determined for available comparison groups. A parallel analysis was performed in patients aged ≥ 80 and ≥ 90.

RESULTS

Our literature search yielded 7429 articles, of which 69 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled incidence rates for adverse events (per 1000 ERCPs) in patients aged ≥ 65 were as follows: perforation 3.8 (95 %CI 1.8 - 7.0), pancreatitis 13.1 (95 %CI 11.0 - 15.5), bleeding 7.7 (95 %CI 5.7 - 10.1), cholangitis 16.1 (95 %CI 11.7 - 21.7), cardiopulmonary events 3.7 (95 %CI 1.5 - 7.6), and death 7.1 (95 %CI 5.2 - 9.4). Patients ≥ 65 had lower rates of pancreatitis (IRR 0.3, 95 %CI 0.3 - 0.4) compared with younger patients. Octogenarians had higher rates of death (IRR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.3 - 4.5) compared with younger patients, whereas nonagenarians had increased rates of bleeding (IRR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.1 - 5.2), cardiopulmonary events (IRR 3.7, 95 %CI 1.0 - 13.9), and death (IRR 3.8, 95 %CI 1.0 - 14.4). Conclusions ERCP appears to be safe in elderly patients, except in the very elderly who are at higher risk of some adverse events. These data on adverse event rates can help to inform clinical decision-making, the consent process, and comparative effectiveness analyses.

Colorectal cancer and the elderly

Colorectal cancer and precancerous adenomas disproportionately affect the elderly, necessitating the need for screening and surveillance in this group. However, screening and surveillance decisions in the elderly can be challenging. Special considerations such as comorbid medical conditions, functional status, and cognitive ability play a role in one's decisions regarding the utility of screening and surveillance as well as the success and safety of various screening modalities. This article explores the evidence for screening and surveillance in the elderly, and addresses key challenges unique to this population.

FIT testing: an overview

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common, but preventable, disease and is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in the U.S. CRC screening has proven effective at reducing both the incidence and mortality of this disease, using any of a number of screening tests available. The test options range from the least invasive and least expensive to more invasive and costly options. Fecal occult blood testing is the oldest, least expensive, and least invasive of these options and has evolved from the poorly sensitive standard guaiac test to the newer and diagnostically superior fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for hemoglobin. This article explores the evolutionary history of fecal occult blood testing, examines test performance characteristics among different FOBTs, and evaluates the role of the FIT in programmatic CRC screening.

Meta-analysis: antibiotic therapy for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth

BACKGROUND

Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is an under-recognised diagnosis with important clinical implications when untreated. However, the optimal treatment regimen remains unclear.

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the clinical effectiveness of antibiotic therapies in the treatment of symptomatic patients with documented SIBO.

METHODS

Four databases were searched to identify clinical trials comparing effectiveness of: (i) different antibiotics, (ii) different doses of the same antibiotic and (iii) antibiotics compared with placebo. Data were independently extracted according to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Study quality was independently assessed. The primary outcome was normalisation of post-treatment breath testing. The secondary outcome was post-treatment clinical response.

RESULTS

Of 1356 articles identified, 10 met inclusion criteria. Rifaximin was the most commonly studied antibiotic (eight studies) with overall breath test normalisation rate of 49.5% (95% confidence interval, CI 44.0-55.1) (44.0%-55.1%) then (46.7%-55.5%), then (4.6%-17.8%). Antibiotic efficacy varied by antibiotic regimen and dose. Antibiotics were more effective than placebo, with a combined breath test normalisation rate of 51.1% (95% CI 46.7-55.5) for antibiotics compared with 9.8% (95% CI 4.6-17.8) for placebo. Meta-analysis of four studies favoured antibiotics over placebo for breath test normalisation with an odds ratio of 2.55 (95% CI 1.29-5.04). Clinical response was heterogeneously evaluated among six studies, but tended to correlate with breath test normalisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics appear to be more effective than placebo for breath test normalisation in patients with symptoms attributable to SIBO, and breath test normalisation may correlate with clinical response. Studies were limited by modest quality, small sample size and heterogeneous design. Additional higher quality clinical trials of SIBO therapy are warranted.

A brief, low-cost intervention improves the quality of ambulatory gastroenterology consultation notes

BACKGROUND

Effective communication between primary care providers and specialty providers is important to facilitate high-quality specialty care. Few studies have assessed the quality of communication from specialist to primary care providers or implemented interventions to improve quality. We developed a brief, low-cost intervention designed to improve the quality of ambulatory gastroenterology consultation notes written by fellows and nurse practitioners in our urban health care system.

METHODS

Six physicians (3 specialists and 3 primary care providers) scored pre- and postintervention notes using an objective quality assessment instrument that had excellent inter-rater reliability. They were blinded to note date, author, and pre/postintervention status. The primary outcome was improvement in Composite Quality Score, an objective, comprehensive assessment of quality. Secondary outcomes included improvements in 3 specific domains, and Global Quality Score (a subjective measure of quality).

RESULTS

Two hundred pre- and 200 postintervention notes written by 6 fellows and 2 nurse practitioners were included. Composite Quality Score improved from 3.74 (of 5) to 4.09 (P <.001 in adjusted analysis). All secondary outcomes improved in adjusted analyses as well. The largest increase was seen in Communication Domain (22% increase). Fellow-written notes had higher scores than nurse practitioner-written notes, but nurse practitioner-written notes improved to a greater degree.

CONCLUSION

A brief, low-cost intervention significantly improved the quality of ambulatory gastroenterology consultation notes written by fellows and nurse practitioners. Communication between primary care providers and specialists is an important area for further study.

Diversity of endoscopy center operations and practice variation across California's safety-net hospital system: a statewide survey

Background

Little is known about endoscopic services provided or operational practice variation within California public hospital endoscopy centers.

Methods

A survey was distributed to all 18 California public hospitals with endoscopy centers to assess operational practices.

Results

Eight of 18 hospitals responded to the survey. Six of the eight responding hospitals used a closed access system for patient referrals. Mean wait time for an endoscopic procedure was 42.4 ± 37.7 days (N = 8) with a mean procedure no-show/cancellation rate of 14.5 ± 8.0% (N = 7). All responding public hospitals performed colonoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, PEG tube placement, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with two hospitals performing endoscopic ultrasound. There was significant practice variation in the documentation of endoscopic quality and performance measurements among the responding hospitals. Multiple methods were used to communicate pathology results to patients: GI clinic visit (6/8), primary physician (4/8), telephone (2/8) or letter (1/8).

Conclusion

Our study highlights the diversity and practice variations of endoscopy center operations at California public hospitals and serves as a catalyst for future collaborations among safety-net hospitals.

Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that advancing age is an independent risk factor for experiencing adverse events during colonoscopy. Yet many of these studies are limited by small sample sizes and/or marked variation in reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence rates for specific adverse events in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy and calculate incidence rate ratios for selected comparison groups.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

Elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Perforation, bleeding, cardiovascular (CV)/pulmonary complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

Our literature search yielded 3328 articles, of which 20 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled incidence rates for adverse events (per 1000 colonoscopies) in patients 65 years of age and older were 26.0 (95% CI, 25.0-27.0) for cumulative GI adverse events, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.9-1.5) for perforation, 6.3 (95% CI, 5.7-7.0) for GI bleeding, 19.1 (95% CI, 18.0-20.3) for CV/pulmonary complications, and 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-2.2) for mortality. Among octogenarians, adverse events (per 1000 colonoscopies) were as follows: cumulative GI adverse event rate of 34.9 (95% CI, 31.9-38.0), perforation rate of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1-1.9), GI bleeding rate of 2.4 (95% CI, 1.1-4.6), CV/pulmonary complication rate of 28.9 (95% CI, 26.2-31.8), and mortality rate of 0.5 (95% CI, 0.06-1.9). Patients 80 years of age and older experienced higher rates of cumulative GI adverse events (incidence rate ratio 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9) and had a greater risk of perforation (incidence rate ratio 1.6, 95% CI, 1.2-2.1) compared with younger patients (younger than 80 years of age). There was an increased trend toward higher rates of GI bleeding and CV/pulmonary complications in octogenarians but neither was statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of studies included and not all complications related to colonoscopy were captured.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients, especially octogenarians, appear to have a higher risk of complications during and after colonoscopy. These data should inform clinical decision making, the consent process, public health policy, and comparative effectiveness analyses.

Prevalence of gastric cancer versus colorectal cancer in Asians with a positive fecal occult blood test

AIM

Prior studies have reported conflicting results on the yield of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT). Our aim was to compare the yield between EGD and colonoscopy performed in a racially diverse population with a positive FOBT.

METHODS

A retrospective, cross-sectional study of FOBT positive patients who underwent EGD and colonoscopy from January 1, 1999 to November 1, 2008. Endoscopic lesions deemed responsible for GI bleeding were identified.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty-seven patients met entry criteria, among which, 63% were Asian and 81% were immigrants to the U.S. Forty-four patients had EGD findings deemed responsible for a positive FOBT, the most common being esophagitis (25.0%) and gastric ulceration (15.9%). Forty-two patients had colonoscopic findings likely responsible for a positive FOBT with the most frequent lesion being colonic polyps ≥9 mm in diameter (76.2%). Prevalence of lower and upper GI tract lesions responsible for positive FOBT was similar (14.6% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.2). There was no association between a patient reporting upper GI symptoms, or the presence of anemia and the detection of upper GI tract lesions on endoscopy. Gastric adenocarcinoma (n = 3) was as prevalent as colorectal adenocarcinoma (n = 4). All three patients with gastric adenocarcinomas were Asian (prevalence 1.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our racially diverse population evaluated for a positive FOBT, gastric adenocarcinoma was as prevalent as colorectal adenocarcinoma; however, gastric adenocarcinoma was limited to Asian patients. EGD and colonoscopy should be considered in the evaluation of patient populations similar to ours, particularly Asian immigrants.

Screening prevalence and incidence of colorectal cancer among American Indian/Alaskan natives in the Indian Health Service

BACKGROUND

Studies on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and incidence among American Indian/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) are few.

AIMS

Our aim was to determine CRC screening prevalence and to calculate CRC incidence among AI/AN receiving care within the Indian Health Service (IHS).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of AI/AN who utilized IHS from 1996 to 2004. AI/AN who were average-risk for CRC and received primary care within IHS were identified by searching the IHS Resource Patient Management System for selected ICD-9/CPT codes (n = 142,051). CRC screening prevalence was calculated and predictors of screening were determined for this group. CRC incidence rates were ascertained for the entire AI/AN population ages 50-80 who received IHS medical care between 1996 and 2004 (n = 283,717).

RESULTS

CRC screening was performed in 4.0% of average-risk AI/AN. CRC screening was more common among women than men (RR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.4-1.7) and among AI/AN living in the Alaska region compared to the Pacific Coast region (RR = 2.5, 95% CI 2.2-2.8) while patients living in the Northern Plains (RR = 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.4) were less likely to have been screened. CRC screening was less common among patients with a greater number of primary care visits. The age-adjusted CRC incidence among AI/AN ages 50-80 was 227 cancers per 100,000 person-years.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC was common among AI/AN receiving medical care within IHS. However, CRC screening prevalence was far lower than has been reported for the U.S. population.

Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in the elderly patient

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Older age is associated with a rise in colorectal cancer and adenomas, necessitating the need for CRC screening in older patients. However, decisions about CRC screening and surveillance in older adults are often difficult and challenging. The decision requires an individualized assessment that incorporates factors unique to performing colonoscopy in older adults in order to weigh the risks and benefits for each patient according to their overall health and preferences. This review addresses the factors unique to colorectal cancer and performing colonoscopy in older adults that are relevant in weighing the risks and benefits of screening and surveillance in this population.

Idiopathic AIDS enteropathy and treatment of gastrointestinal opportunistic pathogens

Diarrhea in patients with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) has proven to be both a diagnostic and treatment challenge since the discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) virus more than 30 years ago. Among the main etiologies of diarrhea in this group of patients are infectious agents that span the array of viruses, bacteria, protozoa, parasites, and fungal organisms. In many instances, highly active antiretroviral therapy remains the cornerstone of therapy for both AIDS and AIDS-related diarrhea, but other targeted therapies have been developed as new pathogens are identified; however, some infections remain treatment challenges. Once identifiable infections as well as other causes of diarrhea are investigated and excluded, a unique entity known as AIDS enteropathy can be diagnosed. Known as an idiopathic, pathogen-negative diarrhea, this disease has been investigated extensively. Atypical viral pathogens, including HIV itself, as well as inflammatory and immunologic responses are potential leading causes of it. Although AIDS enteropathy can pose a diagnostic challenge so too does the treatment of it. Highly active antiretroviral therapy, nutritional supplementation, electrolyte replacements, targeted therapy for infection if indicated, and medications for symptom control all are key elements in the treatment regimen. Importantly, a multidisciplinary approach among the gastroenterologist, infectious disease physician, HIV specialists, oncology, and surgery is necessary for many patients.