TY - JOUR
T1 - Association between improved adenoma detection rates and interval colorectal cancer rates after a quality improvement program
AU - Lam, Angela Y.
AU - Li, Yan
AU - Gregory, Dyanna L.
AU - Prinz, Joanne
AU - O'Reilly, Jacqueline
AU - Manka, Michael
AU - Pandolfino, John E.
AU - Keswani, Rajesh N.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
PY - 2020/8
Y1 - 2020/8
N2 - Background and Aims: Although colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, interval CRCs (iCRCs) still occur. We aimed to determine iCRC incidence, assess the relationship between adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and iCRC rates, and evaluate iCRC rates over time concomitant with initiation of an institutional colonoscopy quality improvement (QI) program. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent colonoscopy at an academic medical center (January 2003 to December 2015). We identified iCRCs through our data warehouse and reviewed charts to confirm appropriateness for study inclusion. iCRC was defined as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 60 months and early iCRC as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 36 months after index colonoscopy. We measured the relationship between provider ADRs and iCRC rates and assessed iCRC rates over time with initiation of a QI program that started in 2010. Results: A total of 193,939 colonoscopies were performed over the study period. We identified 186 patients with iCRC. The overall iCRC rate was.12% and the early iCRC rate.06%. Average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the highest ADR quartile (34%-52%) had a 4-fold lower iCRC risk (relative risk,.23; 95% confidence interval,.11-.48) than those undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the lowest quartile (12%-21%). After QI program initiation, overall iCRC rates improved from.15% to.08% (P <.001) and early iCRC rates improved from.07% to.04% (P =.004). Conclusions: We confirmed that iCRC rate is inversely correlated with provider ADR. ADRs increased and iCRC rates decreased over time, concomitant with a QI program focused on split-dose bowel preparation, quality metric measurement, provider education, and feedback. iCRC rate measurement should be considered a feasible, outcomes-driven institutional metric of colonoscopy quality.
AB - Background and Aims: Although colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, interval CRCs (iCRCs) still occur. We aimed to determine iCRC incidence, assess the relationship between adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and iCRC rates, and evaluate iCRC rates over time concomitant with initiation of an institutional colonoscopy quality improvement (QI) program. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent colonoscopy at an academic medical center (January 2003 to December 2015). We identified iCRCs through our data warehouse and reviewed charts to confirm appropriateness for study inclusion. iCRC was defined as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 60 months and early iCRC as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 36 months after index colonoscopy. We measured the relationship between provider ADRs and iCRC rates and assessed iCRC rates over time with initiation of a QI program that started in 2010. Results: A total of 193,939 colonoscopies were performed over the study period. We identified 186 patients with iCRC. The overall iCRC rate was.12% and the early iCRC rate.06%. Average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the highest ADR quartile (34%-52%) had a 4-fold lower iCRC risk (relative risk,.23; 95% confidence interval,.11-.48) than those undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the lowest quartile (12%-21%). After QI program initiation, overall iCRC rates improved from.15% to.08% (P <.001) and early iCRC rates improved from.07% to.04% (P =.004). Conclusions: We confirmed that iCRC rate is inversely correlated with provider ADR. ADRs increased and iCRC rates decreased over time, concomitant with a QI program focused on split-dose bowel preparation, quality metric measurement, provider education, and feedback. iCRC rate measurement should be considered a feasible, outcomes-driven institutional metric of colonoscopy quality.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083524766&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85083524766&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.016
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.016
M3 - Article
C2 - 32092289
AN - SCOPUS:85083524766
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 92
SP - 355-364.e5
JO - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
IS - 2
ER -