Associations between endoscopist feedback and improvements in colonoscopy quality indicators: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kirles Bishay, Natalia Causada-Calo, Michael A. Scaffidi, Catharine M. Walsh, John T. Anderson, Alaa Rostom, Catherine Dube, Rajesh N. Keswani, Steven J. Heitman, Robert J. Hilsden, Risa Shorr, Samir C. Grover, Nauzer Forbes*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background and Aims: Colonoscopy quality indicators such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) are surrogates for the effectiveness of screening-related colonoscopy. It is unclear whether endoscopist feedback on these indicators improves performance. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether associations exist between endoscopist feedback and colonoscopy performance. Methods: We conducted a search through May 2019 for studies reporting on endoscopist feedback and associations with ADR or other colonoscopy quality indicators. Pooled rate ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences were calculated using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. Subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were performed to assess for potential methodological or clinical factors associated with outcomes. Results: From 1326 initial studies, 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis for ADR, representing 33,184 colonoscopies. Endoscopist feedback was associated with an improvement in ADR (RR, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.34). Low performers derived a greater benefit from feedback (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.18-2.23) compared with moderate performers (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.11-1.29), whereas high performers did not derive a significant benefit (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.99-1.13). Feedback was not associated with increases in withdrawal time (weighted mean difference, +0.43 minutes; 95% CI, −0.50 to +1.36 minutes) or improvements in cecal intubation rate (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.01). Conclusion: Endoscopist feedback is associated with modest improvements in ADR. The implementation of routine endoscopist audit and feedback should be considered alongside other quality improvement interventions in institutions dedicated to the provision of high-quality screening-related colonoscopy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1030-1040.e9
JournalGastrointestinal endoscopy
Volume92
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2020

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Associations between endoscopist feedback and improvements in colonoscopy quality indicators: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this