Process quality and incidence of acute complications in a series of more than 230 000 outpatient colonoscopies

Background and study aims: Data on process quality and complications of colonoscopies are sparse, especially for the screening setting. We describe process quality in routine care, estimate the incidence of acute complications, and identify risk indicators for substandard care and complications.

Patients and methods: We analyzed data from 236 087 compulsory health insurance (CHI) members who underwent colonoscopies in 2006. Data were documented prospectively in the Electronic Colonoscopy Documentation of the Bavarian Association of CHI Physicians, a registry of outpatient colonoscopies performed in practices throughout Bavaria, Germany. It covers demographic characteristics, indications, quality indicators, macroscopic and histological findings, diagnoses, and acute complications.

Results: Colon preparation resulted in clear bowels in 76.31 % of patients, liquid residues in 22.22 %, and dirty bowels in 1.47 %. In total, 92.85 % of the examinations were performed with patients under sedation/analgesia and 97.43 % of colonoscopies were complete. Photodocumentation was present for 98.87 %. Male sex, middle age, screening, satisfactory bowel preparation, and sedation/analgesia were associated with completeness. A total of 735 patients (0.31 %) suffered complications, among them 520 bleedings (0.22 %), 69 perforations (0.03 %), and 152 cardiorespiratory complications (0.06 %). Male sex, higher age, nonscreening indication, biopsies, polypectomies, and absence of sedation/analgesia were indicative of a higher bleeding risk. Perforations were also related to biopsies and polypectomies. Higher age was the only discernible risk indicator for cardiorespiratory events.

Conclusions: Outpatient colonoscopy is a safe procedure with a low risk of acute complications. Improving bowel preparation enhances completeness. Sedation/analgesia is conducive to both completeness and the lowering of the risk of acute complications.

References

• 1 Lieberman D. Colonoscopy as a mass screening tool.  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1998;  10 225-228
• 2 Lin O S, Kozarek R A, Schembre D B. et al . Screening colonoscopy in very elderly patients: prevalence of neoplasia and estimated impact on life expectancy.  JAMA. 2006;  295 2357-2365
• 3 Menges M, Gartner B, Georg T. et al . Cost-benefit analysis of screening colonoscopy in 40- to 50-year-old first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2006;  21 596-601
• 4 O’Leary B A, Olynyk J K, Neville A M, Platell C F. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening: comparison of community-based flexible sigmoidoscopy with fecal occult blood testing and colonoscopy.  J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;  19 38-47
• 5 Levin T R, Zhao W, Conell C. et al . Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system.  Ann Intern Med. 2006;  145 880-886
• 6 Nelson D B, McQuaid K R, Bond J H. et al . Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;  55 307-314
• 7 Regula J, Rupinski M, Kraszewska E. et al . Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia.  N Engl J Med. 2006;  355 1863-1872
• 8 Thiis-Evensen E, Hoff G S, Sauar J, Vatn M H. Patient tolerance of colonoscopy without sedation during screening examination for colorectal polyps.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;  52 606-610
• 9 Bronwicki J P, Venard V, Botte C. et al . Patient-to-patient transmission of hepatitis C virus during colonoscopy.  N Engl J Med. 1997;  337 237-240
• 10 Draenert R, Goebel F D. Risk of viral infections in colonoscopy and endoscopic procedures [article in German].  Internist. 2001;  42 1690-1691
• 11 Rex D K. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;  101 2866-2877
• 12 Becker F, Nusko G, Welke J. et al . Follow-up after colorectal polypectomy: a benefit-risk analysis of German surveillance recommendations.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007;  22 929-939
• 13 Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder .Gebiet und Bevölkerung – Fläche und Bevölkerung. http://www.statistik-portal.de/Statistik-Portal/de_jb01_jahrtab1.asp. Accessed: December 18, 2007. 
• 14 Bundesministerium für Gesundheit .Mitgliederstatistik KM6. http://www.bmg.bund.de/cln_040/nn_601 098/SharedDocs/Download/DE/Datenbanken-Statistiken/Statistiken-Gesundheit/Gesetzliche-Krankenversicherung/Mitglieder-und-Versicherte/2006-km6-lang-xls,templateId = raw,property = publicationFile.xls/2006-km6-lang-xls.xls. Accessed: April 28, 2008. 
• 15 Geißendörfer J, Höhn A. Medizinische Psychologie und Soziologie. Munich; Elsevier 2007
• 16 Sieg A, Theilmeier A. Results of coloscopy screening in 2005 – an internet-based documentation.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2006;  131 379-383
• 17 BundesausschussderÄrzteundKrankenkassen .Richtlinien des Bundesausschusses der Ärzte und Krankenkassen über die Früherkennung von Krebserkrankungen („Krebsfrüherkennungs-Richtlinien”). http://www.g-ba.de/downloads/36–232–17/RL_KFU_2006–12–19.pdf. Accessed: January 2, 2008. 
• 18 Thomeer M, Vanbeckevoort D, Bielen D. et al . Virtual colonoscopy: a new screening tool for colorectal cancer?.  JBR-BTR. 2001;  84 155-163
• 19 Liang K Y, Zeger S L. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models.  Biometrika. 1986;  73 13-22
• 20 Zeger S L, Liang K Y. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.  Biometrics. 1986;  42 121-130
• 21 TumorregisterMünchen .Basis-Statistiken C18: Kolonkarzinom. http://www.tumorregister-muenchen.de/facts/base/base_C18__G.pdf. Accessed: January 3, 2008. 
• 22 Rex D K, Bond J H, Winawer S. et al . Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 1296-1308
• 23 Shah H A, Paszat L F, Saskin R. et al . Factors associated with incomplete colonoscopy: a population-based study.  Gastroenterology. 2007;  132 2297-2303
• 24 Cirroco W C, Rusin L C. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;  38 964-968
• 25 Aslinia F, Uradomo L, Stele A. et al . Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: an analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;  101 873-885
• 26 Anderson J C, Gonzalez J D, Messina C R, Pollack B J. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy: thinner is not alway better.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;  95 2784-2787
• 27 Harewood G C. Relationship of colonoscopy completion rates and endoscopist features.  Dig Dis Sci. 2005;  50 721-731
• 28 Ness R M, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;  96 1797-1802
• 29 Zubarik R, Fleischer D E, Mastropietro C. et al . Prospective analysis of complications 30 days after outpatient colonoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  50 322-328
• 30 Szklo M, Nieto F J. Epidemiology: beyond the basics. Gaithersburg, Maryland; Aspen Publishers Inc 2000
• 31 Mysiliewiec P A, Brown M S, Klabunde C N. et al . Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy?.  Annals Int Med. 2004;  141 264
• 32 Heldwein W, Dollhopf M, Rösch T. et al . The Munich Polypectomy Study (MUPS): prospective analysis of complications and risk Factors in 4000 colonic snare polypectomies.  Endoscopy. 2005;  37 1116-1122
• 33 Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in Deutschland .Projekt wissenschaftliche Begleitung von Früherkennungs-Koloskopien in Deutschland: Berichtszeitraum 2006 – 4. Jahresbericht. www.zi-berlin.de/koloskopie/downloads/Jahresbericht_2006_Berlin_ Vers_1_1.pdf. Accessed: September 7, 2009.