Endoscopy assistants influence the quality of colonoscopy

Abstract

Background Colonoscopy performance varies between endoscopists, but little is known about the impact of endoscopy assistants on key performance indicators. We used a large prospective colonoscopy quality database to perform an exploratory study to evaluate differences in selected quality indicators between endoscopy assistants.

Methods All colonoscopies reported to the Norwegian colonoscopy quality assurance register Gastronet can be used to trace individual endoscopy assistants. We analyzed key quality indicators (cecum intubation rate, polyp detection rate, colonoscopies rated as severely painful, colonoscopies with sedation or analgesia, and satisfaction with information) for colonoscopies performed between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2014. Differences between individual assistants were analyzed by fitting multivariable logistic regression models, with the best performing assistant at each participating hospital as reference. All models were adjusted for the endoscopist.

Results 63 endoscopy assistants from 12 hospitals assisted in 15 365 colonoscopies. Compared with their top performing peers from the same hospital, one assistant was associated with cecum intubation failure, four with poor polyp detection, nine with painful colonoscopy, 16 with administration of sedation or analgesics during colonoscopy, and three with patient dissatisfaction about information given relating to the colonoscopy. The number of procedures during the study period or lifetime experience as an endoscopy assistant were not associated with any quality indicator.

Conclusion In this exploratory study, there was little variation on important colonoscopy quality indicators between endoscopy assistants. However, there were differences among assistants that may be clinically important. Endoscopy assistants should be subject to quality surveillance similarly to endoscopists.

• References

• 1 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 2 Corley DA, Levin TR, Doubeni CA. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 2541
• 3 Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM. et al. Interval cancers after negative colonoscopy: population-based case-control study. Gut 2012; 61: 1576-1582
• 4 Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M. et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative. United European Gastroenterol J 2017; 5: 309-334
• 5 Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT. et al. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2013; 62: 242-249
• 6 Kaminski MF, Anderson J, Valori R. et al. Leadership training to improve adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy: a randomised trial. Gut 2016; 65: 616-624
• 7 Kaminski MF, Wieszczy P, Rupinski M. et al. Increased rate of adenoma detection associates with reduced risk of colorectal cancer and death. Gastroenterology 2017; 153: 98-105
• 8 Dellon ES, Lippmann QK, Galanko JA. et al. Effect of GI endoscopy nurse experience on screening colonoscopy outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 331-343
• 9 Dellon ES, Lippmann QK, Sandler RS. et al. Gastrointestinal endoscopy nurse experience and polyp detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 1342-1347
• 10 Lee CK, Park DI, Lee SH. et al. Participation by experienced endoscopy nurses increases the detection rate of colon polyps during a screening colonoscopy: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 1094-1102
• 11 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G. et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-625
• 12 Bender R, Lange S. Adjusting for multiple testing – when and how?. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54: 343-349
• 13 Bretthauer M, Skovlund E, Grotmol T. et al. Inter-endoscopist variation in polyp and neoplasia pick-up rates in flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol 2003; 38: 1268-1274
• 14 Pohl H, Srivastava A, Bensen SP. et al. Incomplete polyp resection during colonoscopy-results of the complete adenoma resection (CARE) study. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 74-80 e71
• 15 Seip B, Bretthauer M, Dahler S. et al. Patient satisfaction with on-demand sedation for outpatient colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 639-646
• 16 Holme O, Moritz V, Bretthauer M. et al. [Pain in connection with colonoscopy in Norway]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2013; 133: 1074-1078
• 17 Armstrong RA. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2014; 34: 502-508
• 18 Norwegian Centre for Quality Registries. 2015 Available at: https://www.kvalitetsregistre.no/sites/default/files/33_arsrapport_2015_gastronet.pdf