Different screening definitions have little impact on polypectomy rate estimates

BACKGROUND:

Polypectomy rate is a surrogate quality indicator for screening colonoscopy. Various methods for identifying screening colonoscopies have been used and it is unclear how different definitions affect the estimated polypectomy rate.

OBJECTIVE:

To estimate polypectomy rates and how they vary according to the definition of a screening colonoscopy, using patient- and endoscopist-reported indications.

METHODS:

A cross-sectional analysis of endoscopists and their patients 50 to 75 years of age who underwent colonoscopy was conducted. Based on questionnaire responses, four patient indications were derived: perceived screening; perceived nonscreening; medical history indicating nonscreening; and combination of the three indications. Endoscopist indication was derived from a questionnaire completed immediately after colonoscopy. Polypectomy status was obtained from provincial physician billing records. Polypectomy rates were computed, while accounting for physician and hospital level clustering, using all four patient indications, endoscopist indication, and the agreement between patient and endoscopist indications. The effect of indications on polypectomy rate was estimated adjusting for age, sex and family history of colorectal cancer.

RESULTS:

A total of 2134 patients and 45 endoscopists were included. The proportion of colonoscopies classified as screening according to the nine indications ranged from 32.2% to 70.9%. Polypectomy rates ranged between 22.6% and 26.2% for screening colonoscopy, and between 27.1% and 30.8% for nonscreening colonoscopy. Adjusted ORs for indication ranged between 0.74 and 0.94.

DISCUSSION:

Although the proportion of colonoscopies identified as screening varied considerably among the indications, the estimated polypectomy rates were similar.

CONCLUSION:

The findings suggest that the way screening is defined does not greatly affect the estimates of polypectomy rate.     

Polyethylene glycol versus sodium picosulfalte bowel preparation in the setting of a colorectal cancer screening program

BACKGROUND:

Adequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy is an important predictor of colonoscopy quality.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the difference in terms of effectiveness between different existing colon cleansing products in the setting of a colorectal cancer screening program.

METHODS:

The records of consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy at the Montreal General Hospital (Montreal, Quebec) between April 2013 and April 2014 were retrospectively extracted from a dedicated electronic digestive endoscopic institutional database.

RESULTS:

Overall, 2867 charts of patients undergoing colonoscopy were assessed, of which 1130 colonoscopies were performed in a screening setting; patients had adequate bowel preparation in 90%. Quality of preparation was documented in only 61%. Bowel preparation was worse in patients receiving sodium picosulfate (PICO) alone compared with polyethylene glycol, in a screening setting (OR 0.3 [95% CI 0.2 to 0.6]). Regardless of the preparation type, the odds of achieving adequate quality cleansing was 6.6 for patients receiving a split-dose regimen (OR 6.6 [95% CI 2.1 to 21.1]). In multivariable analyses, clinical variables associated with inadequate bowel preparation in combined population were use of PICO, a nonsplit regimen and inpatient status. The polyp detection rate was very high (45.6%) and was correlated with withdrawal time.

CONCLUSION:

Preparation quality needs to be more consistently included in the colonoscopy report. Split-dose regimens increased the quality of colon cleansing across all types of preparations and should be the preferred method of administration. Polyethylene glycol alone provided better bowel cleansing efficacy than PICO in a screening setting but PICO remains an alternative in association with an adjuvant.     

Practice and documentation of performance of colonoscopy in a central Canadian health region

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the reporting and performance of colonoscopy in a large urban centre.

METHODS:

Colonoscopies performed between January and April 2008 in community hospitals and academic centres in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (Manitoba) were identified from hospital discharge databases and retrospective review of a random sample of identified charts. Information regarding reporting of colonoscopies (including bowel preparation, photodocumentation of cecum/ileum, size, site, characteristics and method of polyp removal), colonoscopy completion rates and follow-up recommendations was extracted. Colonoscopy completion rates were compared among different groups of physicians.

RESULTS:

A total of 797 colonoscopies were evaluated. Several deficiencies in reporting were identified. For example, bowel preparation quality was reported in only 20%, the agent used for bowel preparation was recorded in 50%, photodocumentation of colonoscopy completion in 6% and polyp appearance (ie, pedunculated or not) in 34%, and polyp size in 66%. Although the overall colonoscopy completion rate was 92%, there was a significant difference among physicians with varying medical specialty training and volume of procedures performed. Recommendations for follow-up procedures (barium enema, computed tomography colonography or repeat colonoscopy) were recorded for a minority of individuals with reported poor bowel preparation or incomplete colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS:

The present study found many deficiencies in reporting of colonoscopy in typical, city-wide clinical practices. Colonoscopy completion rates varied among different physician specialties. There is an urgent need to adopt standardized colonoscopy reporting systems in everyday practice and to provide feedback to physicians regarding deficiencies so they can be rectified.     

The Miss Rate for Colorectal Adenoma Determined by Quality-Adjusted, Back-to-Back Colonoscopies

Background/Aims

Colonoscopy is considered to be the gold standard for detecting adenomatous polyps. Polyps are missed during colonoscopic examination at a rate that varies from 6% to 27%. The adenoma miss rate affects colonoscopic surveillance intervals and procedural quality. We aimed to assess the adenoma miss rate and the variables affecting the rate using same-day, quality-adjusted, back-to-back colonoscopies.

Methods

This prospective study was performed at a single institution and included 149 patients. Two consecutive same-day colonoscopies were performed by two experienced endoscopists. The adenoma miss rates and variables affecting the missed adenomas, including polyp characteristics and procedure times, were evaluated.

Results

The miss rates of polyps, adenomas, and advanced adenomas were 16.8%, 17%, and 5.4%, respectively. The smaller polyps and increased number of polyps detected during the first colonoscopy were more likely to be missed. A longer insertion time during the colonoscopy was correlated with an increased adenoma detection rate.

Conclusions

There was a significant miss rate in the detection of colonic adenomas even in quality-adjusted, back-to-back colonoscopies. The adenoma miss rate can be reduced with a sufficient observation time during colonoscopic insertion. The development of specific technological methods to reduce the adenoma miss rate is necessary.     

A prospective intervention study of colonoscopy reporting among patients screened or surveilled for colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND:

The impact of modifying electronic colonoscopy reporting software for improving adherence to guidelines regarding quality standards documentation remains poorly characterized.

METHODS:

Consecutive colonoscopy reports of patients undergoing screening or surveillance for colorectal neoplasia were reviewed. Following a pre-intervention quality audit conducted in 2009, some modifications were made to the reporting software (Endoworks, Olympus Corporation, USA), including changes to field navigation, drop-down menus and visual cues, to optimize all compulsory items identified by existing guidelines in the report-generating template. Results from both audits were compared. Independent validation of 10% of all data was completed.

RESULTS:

In 250 patient reports (mean [± SD] age 61.7±10.2 years, 51.2% female, February to May 2011) of five endoscopists (mean 11.6±7.8 years in practice), procedural indication was always present, as was informed consent. Seventy-six per cent of patients had undergone previous colonoscopy, 41% provided a previous colonoscopy date, with details on past polyp removal in 42.9%. Most procedural indicators were recorded (examination date 100%, medications given 100%, difficulty level 96.4%, preparation quality 100%). All reports noted extent of visualization (cecal intubation in 97.6%, photo documentation in 96.8%). Total procedural time was recorded in 8.2% and withdrawal time in 44%. Polyps were reported in 112 patients (44.8%), with polyp size (5.01±4.42 mm) reported in 95.5%, morphology in 88.4% and anatomical location in all. The method of polyp removal was missing in 2.7% of reports. Significant improvements were noted in the documentation of withdrawal and total time, cecal landmarks, type of bowel preparation, completeness of removal, morphology and method of polyp removal, and photo documentation compared with the 2009 audit.

CONCLUSION:

These results illustrate the value of targeted modifications to an electronic colonoscopic reporting system in significantly enhancing the quality of reporting.     

Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Era of the Affordable Care Act

Background

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated cost-sharing for evidence-based preventive services in an effort to encourage use.

Objective

To evaluate use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a national population-based sample before and after implementation of the ACA.

Design

Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) between 2009 and 2012 comparing CRC screening rates before and after implementation of the ACA.

Participants

Adults 50–64 with private health insurance and adults 65–75 with Medicare.

Main Measures

Self-reported receipt of screening colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) within the past year among those eligible for screening.

Key Results

Our study included 8617 adults aged 50–64 and 3761 adults aged 65–75. MEPS response rates ranged from 58 to 63%. Among adults aged 50–64, 18.9–20.9% received a colonoscopy in the survey year, 0.59–2.1% received a sigmoidoscopy, and 7.9–10.4% received an FOBT. For adults aged 65–75, 23.6–27.7% received a colonoscopy, 1.3–3.2% a sigmoidoscopy, and 13.5–16.4% an FOBT. In adjusted analyses, among participants aged 50–64, there was no increase in yearly rates of colonoscopy (−0.28 percentage points, 95% CI −2.3 to 1.7, p = 0.78), sigmoidoscopy (−1.1%, 95% CI −1.7 to −0.46, p = <0.001), or FOBT (−1.6%, 95% CI −3.2 to −0.03, p = 0.046) post-ACA. For those aged 65–75, rates of colonoscopy (+2.3%, 95% CI −1.4 to 6.0, p = 0.22), sigmoidoscopy (+0.34%, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.6, p = 0.58) and FOBT (−0.65, 95% CI −4.1 to 2.8, p = 0.72) did not increase. Among those aged 65–75 with Medicare and no additional insurance, the use of colonoscopy rose by 12.0% (95% CI 3.3 to 20.8, p = 0.007). Among participants with Medicare living in poverty, colonoscopy use also increased (+5.7%, 95% CI 0.18 to 11.3, p = 0.043).

Conclusions

Eliminating cost-sharing for CRC screening has not resulted in changes in the use of CRC screening services for many Americans, although use may have increased in the post-ACA period among some Medicare beneficiaries.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11606-015-3504-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.KEY WORDS: colorectal cancer, health care reform, health insurance, preventive care     

Rate of serious complications of colonoscopy in Quebec

BACKGROUND

The rate of serious complications is one marker of the quality of colonoscopy services.

OBJECTIVE:

To estimate the rate of serious complications of colonoscopy according to colonoscopy indication and polypectomy status.

METHODS:

A prospective cohort study of patients scheduled for colonoscopy who were recruited from seven endoscopy facilities across Montreal (Quebec) was conducted. Before colonoscopy, patients completed a brief questionnaire and provided their health insurance numbers. Colonoscopy indication was based on patient-reported medical history. Polypectomy status was obtained from provincial physician billing records (Régie de l’assurance maladie du Québec). Diagnoses and procedures associated with hospitalization in the 30 days following colonoscopy were obtained from the provincial hospitalization database (MedEcho).

RESULTS:

Of the 2134 patients enrolled (mean age 60.9 years, 50.1% male), 33 (1.55% [95% CI 1.06% to 2.16%]) were hospitalized within 30 days. One patient experienced bleeding following a colonoscopy that involved polypectomy and was diagnosed with carcinoma in situ of the rectum. Based on self-reported rectal bleeding in the previous six months, the colonoscopy was nonscreening. The provincial hospitalization data showed no occurrences of perforation, diverticulitis, myocardial infarction/stroke or death; thus, the rate of serious colonoscopy complications was 0.05% (95% CI 0.00% to 0.26%).

DISCUSSION:

The rate of serious colonoscopy complications requiring hospitalization was low and comparable with what is reported in the literature. The serious complication occurred subsequent to polypectomy and in a nonscreening colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION:

The findings support the relative safety of screening colonoscopy in persons without large bowel diseases and symptoms. However, future research to determine the rate of serious complications not requiring hospitalization is warranted to reassure decision makers of the safety of colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.     

The quality of screening colonoscopies in an office-based endoscopy clinic

BACKGROUND:

Wait times for hospital screening colonoscopy have increased dramatically in recent years, resulting in an increase in patient referrals to office-based endoscopy clinics. There is no formal regulation of office endoscopy, and it has been suggested that the quality of service in some office locations may be inferior to hospital procedures.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the quality of office-based screening colonos-copies at a clinic in Oakville, Ontario, with published benchmarks for cecal intubation, withdrawal times, polyp detection, adenoma detection, cancer detection and patient complications.

METHODS:

Demographic information on consecutive patients and colonoscopy reports by all nine gastroenterologists at the Oakville Endoscopy Centre between August 2006 and December 2007 were prospectively obtained.

RESULTS:

A total of 3741 colonoscopies were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years and 51.9% were women. The cecal intubation rate was 98.98% with an average withdrawal time of 9.75 min. A total of 3857 polyps were retrieved from 1725 patients (46.11%), and 1721 adenomas were detected in 953 patients (25.47%). A total of 126 patients (3.37%) had advanced polyps and 18 (0.48%) were diagnosed with colon cancer. One patient (0.027%) had a colonic perforation and two patients had postpolypectomy bleeding (0.053%). These results meet or exceed published benchmarks for quality colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Oakville Endoscopy Centre data demonstrate that office-based colonoscopies, performed by well-trained physicians using adequate sedation and hospital-grade equipment, result in outcomes at least equal to or better than those of published academic/community hospital practices and are therefore a viable option for the future of screening colonoscopy in Canada.     

Incomplete colonoscopy: Maximizing completion rates of gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

Cecal intubation is one of the goals of a quality colonoscopy; however, many factors increasing the risk of incomplete colonoscopy have been implicated. The implications of missed pathology and the demand on health care resources for return colonoscopies pose a conundrum to many physicians. The optimal course of action after incomplete colonoscopy is unclear.

OBJECTIVES:

To assess endoscopic completion rates of previously incomplete colonoscopies, the methods used to complete them and the factors that led to the previous incomplete procedure.

METHODS:

All patients who previously underwent incomplete colonoscopy (2005 to 2010) and were referred to St Paul’s Hospital (Vancouver, British Columbia) were evaluated. Colonoscopies were re-attempted by a single endoscopist. Patient charts were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS:

A total of 90 patients (29 males) with a mean (± SD) age of 58±13.2 years were included in the analysis. Thirty patients (33%) had their initial colonoscopy performed by a gastroenterologist. Indications for initial colonoscopy included surveillance or screening (23%), abdominal pain (15%), gastrointestinal bleeding (29%), change in bowel habits or constitutional symptoms (18%), anemia (7%) and chronic diarrhea (8%). Reasons for incomplete colonoscopy included poor preparation (11%), pain or inadequate sedation (16%), tortuous colon (30%), diverticular disease (6%), obstructing mass (6%) and stricturing disease (10%). Reasons for incomplete procedures in the remaining 21% of patients were not reported by the referring physician. Eighty-seven (97%) colonoscopies were subsequently completed in a single attempt at the institution. Seventy-six (84%) colonoscopies were performed using routine manoeuvres, patient positioning and a variable-stiffness colonoscope (either standard or pediatric). A standard 160 or 180 series Olympus gastroscope (Olympus, Japan) was used in five patients (6%) to navigate through sigmoid diverticular disease; a pediatric colonoscope was used in six patients (7%) for similar reasons. Repeat colonoscopy on the remaining three patients (3%) failed: all three required surgery for strictures (two had obstructing malignant masses and one had a severe benign obstructing sigmoid diverticular stricture).

CONCLUSION:

Most patients with previous incomplete colonoscopy can undergo a successful repeat colonoscopy at a tertiary care centre with instruments that are readily available to most gastroenterologists. Other modalities for evaluation of the colon should be deferred until a second attempt is made at an expert centre.     

A multicentre, observational study of sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate as a precolonoscopy bowel preparation

BACKGROUND:

Sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (PSMC) has been available as a precolonoscopy bowel preparation in Canada since 2005. A high patient acceptability and preference appears to have contributed to its wide adoption across the country. Despite its frequent use, there are relatively few published studies of this product, especially reports regarding its use in routine clinical practice. Moreover, to date, there have been no Canadian studies of any kind.

OBJECTIVE:

To conduct a preliminary evaluation of PSMC by prospectively collecting data describing its effectiveness.

METHODS:

In the present multicentre, observational study, sequential patients used PSMC according to each institution’s standard colonoscopy protocol. Differences in bowel cleansing protocols included dose timing, fluid intake, dietary restrictions and administration of bisacodyl. During colonoscopy, preparation quality was rated separately for the right and left sides of the colon.

RESULTS:

Of the 613 patients entered, 606 were evaluable for efficacy. For the right and left colon, respectively, 93.0% and 96.2% of preparations were rated either ‘excellent’ or ‘adequate’. In the 334 patients who received adjunctive bisacodyl and the 272 patients who did not, the results were similar: for the right and left colon, 92.3% and 97.1% of those who did not, and 93.4% and 95.7% of those who did receive bisacodyl, respectively, were rated either ‘excellent’ or ‘adequate’.

CONCLUSIONS:

Despite the differences in bowel cleansing protocols used at each hospital (including an additional laxative), PSMC consistently yielded a high percentage of positive ratings for efficacy.     

Factors associated with colonoscopy performed in nonhospital settings

BACKGROUND:

Colonoscopy is being increasingly performed in facilities outside of hospitals. Regulation of these facilities is variable, and concerns regarding the quality of procedures in nonhospital (NH) settings have been raised. Further study is needed to better understand endoscopic practice in these facilities.

OBJECTIVES:

To describe NH-based colonoscopy practice in Ontario from 1993 to 2005, and to identify patient (age, sex, income quintile and comorbidity) and physician (specialty and colonoscopy volume) factors associated with this practice.

METHODS:

The present study was a population-based, cross-sectional analysis using health administrative data from Ontario adults who underwent at least one outpatient colonoscopy between 1993 and 2005. A total of 1,240,781 patients underwent 1,917,714 colonoscopies. The main outcome measure was the receipt of colonoscopy in an NH facility.

RESULTS:

An increase in NH-based colonoscopy from 10.0% in 1993 to 15.1% in 2005 (P<0.0001) was found. In the multivariate model, younger, healthier men living in higher income areas were significantly more likely to undergo NH-based colonoscopy. Surgeons and other practitioners (eg, nongastroenterologists and noninternists) were significantly more likely to practice in NH settings. Physicians in the highest colonoscopy volume quintile were 25 times more likely to practice in NH settings than those in the lowest volume quintile (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION:

Rates of NH-based colonoscopy are rising in Ontario. High-volume endoscopists and surgeons are most likely to practice in NH settings. Given its increasing use, further study of the practice and the regulation of NH colonoscopy is warranted.     

Overuse of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Ongoing efforts to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates have raised concerns that these exams may be overused, thereby subjecting patients to unnecessary risks and wasting healthcare resources.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to measure overuse of screening and surveillance colonoscopies among average-risk adults, and to identify correlates of overuse.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Our approach was a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record data for patients 50–65 years old with no personal history of CRC or colorectal adenomas with an incident CRC screening colonoscopy from 2001 to 2010 within a multispecialty physician group practice.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We measured time to next screening or surveillance colonoscopy and predictors of overuse (exam performed more than one year earlier than guideline recommended intervals) of colonoscopies.

KEY RESULTS

We identified 1,429 adults who had an incident colonoscopy between 2001 and 2010, and they underwent an additional 871 screening or surveillance colonoscopies during a median follow-up of 6 years. Most follow-up screening colonoscopies (88 %) and many surveillance colonoscopies (49 %) repeated during the study represented overuse. Time to next colonoscopy after incident screening varied by exam findings (no polyp: median 6.9 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 5.1–10.0; hyperplastic polyp: 5.7 years, IQR: 4.9–9.7; low-risk adenoma: 5.1 years, IQR: 3.3–6.3; high-risk adenoma: 2.9 years, IQR: 2.0–3.4, p < 0.001). In logistic regression models of colonoscopy overuse, an endoscopist recommendation for early follow-up was strongly associated with overuse of screening colonoscopy (OR 6.27, 95 % CI: 3.15–12.50) and surveillance colonoscopy (OR 13.47, 95 % CI 6.61-27.46). In a multilevel logistic regression model, variation in the overuse of screening colonoscopy was significantly associated with the endoscopist performing the previous exam.

CONCLUSIONS

Overuse of screening and surveillance exams are common and should be monitored by healthcare systems. Variations in endoscopist recommendations represent targets for interventions to reduce overuse.KEY WORDS: colorectal cancer screening, colonoscopy, overuse, efficiency     

Does Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Plus Ascorbic Acid Induce More Mucosal Injuries than Split-Dose 4-L PEG during Bowel Preparation?

Background/Aims

The aims of this study were to compare the bowel-cleansing efficacy, patient affinity for the preparation solution, and mucosal injury between a split dose of poly-ethylene glycol (SD-PEG) and low-volume PEG plus ascorbic acid (LV-PEG+Asc) in outpatient scheduled colonoscopies.

Methods

Of the 319 patients, 160 were enrolled for SD-PEG, and 159 for LV-PEG+Asc. The bowel-cleansing efficacy was rated according to the Ottawa bowel preparation scale. Patient affinity for the preparation solution was assessed using a questionnaire. All mucosal injuries observed during colonoscopy were biopsied and histopathologically reviewed.

Results

There was no significant difference in bowel cleansing between the groups. The LV-PEG+Asc group reported better patient acceptance and preference. There were no significant differences in the incidence or characteristics of the mucosal injuries between the two groups.

Conclusions

Compared with SD-PEG, LV-PEG+Asc exhibited equivalent bowel-cleansing efficacy and resulted in improved patient acceptance and preference. There was no significant difference in mucosal injury between SD-PEG and LV-PEG+Asc. Thus, the LV-PEG+Asc preparation could be used more effectively and easily for routine colonoscopies without risking significant mucosal injury.     

Importance of the Time Interval between Bowel Preparation and Colonoscopy in Determining the Quality of Bowel Preparation for Full-Dose Polyethylene Glycol Preparation

Background/Aims

The quality of bowel preparation (QBP) is the important factor in performing a successful colonoscopy. Several factors influencing QBP have been reported; however, some factors, such as the optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy time interval, remain controversial. This study aimed to determine the factors influencing QBP and the optimal time interval for full-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation.

Methods

A total of 165 patients who underwent colonoscopy from June 2012 to August 2012 were prospectively evaluated. The QBP was assessed using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (Ottawa) score according to several factors influencing the QBP were analyzed.

Results

Colonoscopies with a time interval of 5 to 6 hours had the best Ottawa score in all parts of the colon. Patients with time intervals of 6 hours or less had the better QBP than those with time intervals of more than 6 hours (p=0.046). In the multivariate analysis, the time interval (odds ratio, 1.897; 95% confidence interval, 1.006 to 3.577; p=0.048) was the only significant contributor to a satisfactory bowel preparation.

Conclusions

The optimal time was 5 to 6 hours for the full-dose PEG method, and the time interval was the only significant contributor to a satisfactory bowel preparation.     

Timing and frequency of bowel activity in patients ingesting sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate and adjuvant bisacodyl for colon cleansing before colonoscopy

BACKGROUND:

Despite the wealth of research investigating bowel cleansing efficacy, there are very little data on the timing or frequency of bowel movements after each agent is ingested.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the effect of each component of a three-day combined sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate (PSLX) and bisacodyl regimen on the timing and frequency of bowel activity in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS:

Outpatients booked for colonoscopy were asked to complete a diary of their bowel preparation that tracked the timing of bowel movements. Bowel preparation quality was assessed using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale. Bowel activity was compared with baseline and correlated with colon cleansing. Subgroup analysis was performed examining the effect of timing of the procedure and split-dose regimens.

RESULTS:

One hundred patients undergoing colon cleansing received bisacodyl 10 mg at 17:00 three days and two days before the day of colonoscopy. In one group, both sachets of PSLX were given the night before colonoscopy, while the second group, whose colonoscopies were scheduled after 11:00, ingested one sachet the night before and the second sachet at 06:00 on the day of colonoscopy. Patients had a mean of 1.7 bowel movements per day in the seven days before starting the cleansing regimen. Both doses of bisacodyl tablets resulted in a significant increase in the mean number of bowel movements compared with baseline (3.3/day first dose; 3.8/day second dose [P=0.03 and 0.001, respectively]). Each dose of PSLX also resulted in a significant increase in bowel movement frequency compared with baseline, with means of 4.4, 6.3 and 4.5 bowel movements after each dose. The mean time to the final bowel movement following the second sachet of PSLX was 8.9 h when taken the night before, and 3.9 h when taken the morning of the procedure. Bowel preparation quality significantly correlated with bowel frequency when total bowel movements were considered and when only the effects of bisacodyl were accounted for (P<0.01 for each).

DISCUSSION:

These data demonstrate that the addition of bisacodyl before PSLX ingestion has a significant additive effect on bowel frequency and correlates with bowel cleansing quality. The timing of the resulting bowel movements have practical implications for sleep and travel times to endoscopy suites.     

Rates of minor adverse events and health resource utilization postcolonoscopy

BACKGROUND:

Little is known about minor adverse events (MAEs) following outpatient colonoscopies and associated health care resource utilization.

OBJECTIVE:

To estimate the rates of incident MAE at two, 14 and 30 days postcolonoscopy, and associated health care resource utilization. A secondary aim was to identify factors associated with cumulative 30-day MAE incidence.

METHODS:

A longitudinal cohort study was conducted among individuals undergoing an outpatient colonoscopy at the Montreal General Hospital (Montreal, Quebec). Before colonoscopy, consecutive individuals were enrolled and interviewed to obtain data regarding age, sex, comorbidities, use of antiplatelets/anticoagulants and previous symptoms. Endoscopy reports were reviewed for intracolonoscopy procedures (biopsy, polypectomy). Telephone or Internet follow-up was used to obtain data regarding MAEs (abdominal pain, bloating, diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting, blood in the stools, rectal or anal pain, headaches, other) and health resource use (visits to emergency department, primary care doctor, gastroenterologist; consults with nurse, pharmacist or telephone hotline). Rates of incident MAEs and health resources utilization were estimated using Bayesian hierarchical modelling to account for patient clustering within physician practices.

RESULTS:

Of the 705 individuals approached, 420 (59.6%) were enrolled. Incident MAE rates at the two-, 14- and 30-day follow-ups were 17.3% (95% credible interval [CrI] 8.1% to 30%), 10.5% (95% CrI 2.9% to 23.7%) and 3.2% (95% CrI 0.01% to 19.8%), respectively. The 30-day rate of health resources utilization was 1.7%, with 0.95% of participants seeking the services of a physician. No predictors of the cumulative 30-day incidence of MAEs were identified.

DISCUSSION:

The incidence of MAEs was highest in the 48 h following colonoscopy and uncommon after two weeks, supporting the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology’s recommendation for assessment of late complications at 14 days. Predictors of new onset of MAEs were not identified, but wide CrIs did not rule out possible associations. Although <1% of participants reported consulting a physician for MAEs, this figure may represent a substantial number of visits given the increasing number of colonoscopies performed annually.

CONCLUSION:

Postcolonoscopy MAEs are common, occur mainly in the first two weeks postcolonoscopy and result in little use of health resources.     

A randomized controlled trial of four precolonoscopy bowel cleansing regimens

BACKGROUND:

The ideal bowel cleansing regimen for colonoscopy has yet to be determined.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the cleansing efficacy, and patient tolerability and safety of four bowel preparation regimens.

METHODS:

A total of 834 patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were randomly assigned to one of four regimens: 4 L polyethylene glycol (PEG); 2 L PEG + 20 mg bisacodyl; 90 mL of sodium phosphate (NaP); or two sachets of a commercially available bowel cleansing solution (PSMC) + 300 mL of magnesium citrate (M). The primary outcome measure was cleansing efficacy, which was scored by blinded endoscopists using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcome measures were bowel preparation quality according to time of colonoscopy, and patient tolerability and safety.

RESULTS:

The mean total cleansing score was significantly worse in the NaP group compared with the other three groups (P<0.0001). The mean cleansing scores were worse in patients who underwent morning versus afternoon colonoscopy, a finding that was consistent in all four groups. PSMC + M was the best tolerated regimen. No clinically significant mean changes in creatinine or electrolyte levels were identified, although a significantly higher proportion of patients in the NaP group developed hypokelemia (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

2 L PEG + 20 mg bisacodyl, or PSMC + M was as efficacious as 4 L PEG and superior to NaP for bowel cleansing. A short interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy (ie, ‘runway time’), irrespective of bowel preparation regimen, appeared to be a more important predictor of bowel cleanliness than the cathartic agents used.     

A Clear Liquid Diet Is Not Mandatory for Polyethylene Glycol-Based Bowel Preparation for Afternoon Colonoscopy in Healthy Outpatients

Background/Aims

A dietary regimen consisting of a clear liquid diet (CLD) for at least 24 hours is recommended for colonoscopy preparation. However, this requirement results in problems in patient compliance with bowel preparation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a CLD compared with a regular diet (RD) for colonoscopy preparation using a polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized, investigator-blind prospective study. A total of 801 healthy outpatients undergoing afternoon colonoscopy were randomized to either a CLD or RD in addition to a 4 L PEG regimen.

Results

The quality of bowel cleansing was not different between the CLD and RD groups in terms of the proportion with excellent or good preparation. In addition, no significant differences were observed between the two groups for polyp and adenoma detection rates and overall adverse events. Good compliance with bowel preparation was higher in the RD group than in the CLD group.

Conclusions

A CLD for a full day prior to colonoscopy should not be mandatory for PEG-based bowel preparation. Dietary education concerning the avoidance of high-fiber foods for 3 days before colonoscopy is sufficient, at least for healthy outpatients.     

Screening Colonoscopy in the US: Attitudes and Practices of Primary Care Physicians

Background

Rising colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in the last decade are attributable almost entirely to increased colonoscopy use. Little is known about factors driving the increase, but primary care physicians (PCPs) play a central role in CRC screening delivery.

Objective

Explore PCP attitudes toward screening colonoscopy and their associations with CRC screening practice patterns.

Design

Cross-sectional analysis of data from a nationally representative survey conducted in 2006–2007.

Participants

1,266 family physicians, general practitioners, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists.

Main Measures

Physician-reported changes in the volume of screening tests ordered, performed or supervised in the past 3 years, attitudes toward colonoscopy, the influence of evidence and perceived norms on their recommendations, challenges to screening, and practice characteristics.

Results

The cooperation rate (excludes physicians without valid contact information) was 75%; 28% reported their volume of FOBT ordering had increased substantially or somewhat, and the majority (53%) reported their sigmoidoscopy volume decreased either substantially or somewhat. A majority (73%) reported that colonoscopy volume increased somewhat or substantially. The majority (86%) strongly agreed that colonoscopy was the best of the available CRC screening tests; 69% thought it was readily available for their patients; 59% strongly or somewhat agreed that they might be sued if they did not offer colonoscopy to their patients. All three attitudes were significantly related to substantial increases in colonoscopy ordering.

Conclusions

PCPs report greatly increased colonoscopy recommendation relative to other screening tests, and highly favorable attitudes about colonoscopy. Greater emphasis is needed on informed decision-making with patients about preferences for test options.KEY WORDS: colorectal cancer screening, primary care physicians, colonoscopy screening practices     

A survey of sedation practices for colonoscopy in Canada

BACKGROUND:

There are limited data regarding the use of sedation for colonoscopy and concomitant monitoring practices in different countries.

METHODS:

A survey was mailed to 445 clinician members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and 80 members of the Canadian Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons in May and June 2009.

RESULTS:

Sixty-five per cent of Canadian Association of Gastroenterology members and 69% of Canadian Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons members responded with the full survey. Most endoscopists reported using sedation for more than 90% of colonoscopies. The most common sedation regimen was a combination of midazolam and fentanyl. Propofol, either alone or with another drug, was used in 12% of cases. A higher proportion (94%) of adult gastroenterologists who routinely used propofol were highly satisfied compared with those using other sedative agents (45%; P<0.001). Fifty per cent of adult gastroenterologists and 29% of surgeons who were not currently using propofol expressed interest in starting to use it for routine colonoscopies. Only a single nurse was present in the endoscopy room during colonoscopy performed by two-thirds of the endoscopists.

CONCLUSIONS:

Results of the present survey suggest that gastroenterologists in Canada use sedation for colonoscopy in more than 90% of their patients. There was higher satisfaction among gastroenterologists who used propofol routinely for all colonoscopies. Most endoscopy rooms were staffed by a single nurse, which may limit further increases in the use of propofol. Further studies are needed to determine optimal staffing of endoscopy units with and without the use of propofol. Sedation practices of general surgery endoscopists need to be evaluated.