Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(8): e2229538, 2022 08 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36044211

RESUMO

Importance: Trainees routinely participate in colonoscopy procedures, yet whether their involvement is positively or negatively associated with procedural quality is unknown because prior studies involved small number of trainees and/or supervisors, lacked generalizability, and/or failed to adjust for potential confounders. Objective: To assess the association between trainee participation and colonoscopy quality metrics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter population-based cohort study was conducted at 21 academic and community hospitals between April 1, 2017, and October 31, 2018, among consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. Procedures performed by endoscopists who did not supervise trainees were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed from April 3, 2017, to October 31, 2018. Exposure: Participation by a trainee, defined as a resident or fellow enrolled in a gastroenterology or general surgery training program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and perforation rate. Results: A total of 35 499 colonoscopies (18 989 women [53.5%]; mean [SD] patient age, 60.0 [14.1] years) were performed by 71 physicians (mean [SD] time in practice, 14.0 [9.3] years); 5941 colonoscopies (16.7%) involved trainees. There were no significant differences in the ADR (26.4% vs 27.3%; P = .19), CIR (96.7% vs 97.2%; P = .07), and perforation rate (0.05% vs 0.06%; P = .82) when trainees participated vs when they did not participate, whereas the the ssPDR (4.4% vs 5.2%; P = .009) and PDR (39.2% vs 42.0%; P < .001) were significantly lower when trainees participated vs when they did not. After adjustment for potential confounders, the ADR (risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; P = .30), PDR (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04; P = .47), and CIR (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10; P = .38) were not associated with trainee participation, although the ssPDR remained significantly lower (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that trainee involvement during colonoscopy was associated with reduced ssPDR but not other colonoscopy outcome measures. Extra care should be exercised when examining the right colon when trainees are involved.


Assuntos
Adenoma , Pólipos do Colo , Adenoma/diagnóstico , Adulto , Ceco , Estudos de Coortes , Pólipos do Colo/diagnóstico , Pólipos do Colo/cirurgia , Colonoscopia , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
2.
Clin Transl Sci ; 14(4): 1338-1348, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33620159

RESUMO

Consensus guidelines exist for genotype-guided fluoropyrimidine dosing based on variation in the gene dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD). However, these guidelines have not been widely implemented in North America and most studies of pretreatment DPYD screening have been conducted in Europe. Given regional differences in treatment practices and rates of adverse events (AEs), we investigated the impact of pretreatment DPYD genotyping on AEs in a Canadian context. Patients referred for DPYD genotyping prior to fluoropyrimidine treatment were enrolled from December 2013 through November 2019 and followed until completion of fluoropyrimidine treatment. Patients were genotyped for DPYD c.1905+1G>A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G, and c.1236G>A. Genotype-guided dosing recommendations were informed by Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who experienced a severe fluoropyrimidine-related AE (grade ≥3, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0). Secondary outcomes included early severe AEs, severe AEs by toxicity category, discontinuation of fluoropyrimidine treatment due to AEs, and fluoropyrimidine-related death. Among 1394 patients, mean (SD) age was 64 (12) years, 764 (54.8%) were men, and 47 (3.4%) were DPYD variant carriers treated with dose reduction. Eleven variant carriers (23%) and 418 (31.0%) noncarriers experienced a severe fluoropyrimidine-related AE (p = 0.265). Six carriers (15%) and 284 noncarriers (21.1%) experienced early severe fluoropyrimidine-related AEs (p = 0.167). DPYD variant carriers treated with genotype-guided dosing did not experience an increased risk for severe AEs. Our data support a role for DPYD genotyping in the use of fluoropyrimidines in North America.


Assuntos
Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Deficiência da Di-Hidropirimidina Desidrogenase/diagnóstico , Di-Hidrouracila Desidrogenase (NADP)/genética , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/farmacocinética , Canadá , Capecitabina/administração & dosagem , Capecitabina/efeitos adversos , Capecitabina/farmacocinética , Deficiência da Di-Hidropirimidina Desidrogenase/genética , Di-Hidrouracila Desidrogenase (NADP)/metabolismo , Feminino , Fluoruracila/administração & dosagem , Fluoruracila/efeitos adversos , Fluoruracila/farmacocinética , Heterozigoto , Humanos , Masculino , Oncologia/normas , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/genética , Testes Farmacogenômicos/normas , Variantes Farmacogenômicos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Medicina de Precisão/normas , Medicina de Precisão/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos
3.
Endosc Int Open ; 5(7): E675-E682, 2017 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28691053

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important measure of colonoscopy quality, as are polyp, advanced ADR, and adenocarcinoma detection rates. We investigated whether performance report cards improved these outcome measures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Endoscopists were given report cards comparing their detection rates to the institutional mean on an annual basis. Detection rates were evaluated at baseline, 1 year after report cards (Year 1), and 2 years after report cards (Year 2). Endoscopists were unaware of the study and received no other interventions. The primary outcome was ADR and secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced ADR, and adenocarcinoma detection rate. Multivariate regression was performed to adjust for temporal trends in patient, endoscopists, and procedural factors. RESULTS: Seventeen physicians performed 3,118 screening colonoscopies in patients with positive FOBT or family history of colon cancer. The ADR increased from 34.5 % (baseline) to 39.4 % (Year 1) and 41.2 % (Year 2) ( P  = 0.0037). The PDR increased from 45 % (baseline) to 48.8 % (Year 1) and 51.8 % (Year 2) ( P  = 0.011). There was no significant improvement in advanced ADR or adenocarcinoma detection rates. On multivariate analysis, the ADR increased by 22 % in Year 1 ( P  = 0.03) and 30 % in Year 2 ( P  = 0.008). Among physicians with a baseline ADR < 25 %, improvement in ADR was even greater, increasing 2.2 times by the end of the study ( P  = 0.004). Improvements in ADR were not correlated with specialty although gastroenterologists were 52 % more likely to find an adenoma than general surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Annual performance report cards increased adenoma detection rates, especially among physicians with low ADR < 25 %.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA