Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia.

Anal squamous cell cancer (SCC) is a relatively uncommon cancer in the United States. Anal SCC has long been associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positivity and/or men who have sex with men. The incidence of anal SCC has been increasing in both genders regardless of HIV status. Few clinicians are aware that white women, when not controlling for gender and sexual preference together, have the highest incidence of anal SCC. Anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN), dysplastic cells of the anal canal due to human papilloma virus infection, is believed to be the precursor to anal SCC. A vaccination has been approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of high-risk human papilloma virus infections in presexually active girls and boys. Currently, there are no consensus guidelines for AIN screening, treatment or follow-up. Although anal SCC is treatable when caught early, treatment is often associated with significant morbidity. The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness of anal SCC and its precursor, AIN, in the non-HIV+ and non-MSM populations, and discuss means by which to decrease the incidence of anal SCC in all populations.

Comparisons of screening colonoscopy performed by a nurse practitioner and gastroenterologists: a single-center randomized controlled trial.

Several barriers to colorectal cancer screening have been identified including limited access to trained endoscopists and highlight insufficient capacity to meet projected demand for colonoscopies. Two European studies have found that nonphysician providers can perform colonoscopies as safely and accurately as physicians. Training nurse practitioners (NP) to perform colonoscopy may be an effective strategy to increase access. The goal of this study was to compare accuracy, safety, and patient satisfaction in screening colonoscopy performed by board certified gastroenterologists (GI-MD) and a gastroenterology trained nurse practitioner (GI-NP). A consecutive sample of average risk participants referred for screening colonoscopy was randomized to have their procedure performed by either a GI-MD (n = 100) or a GI-NP (n = 50). Participants completed a preprocedure and postprocedure questionnaire. Endoscopists completed a postprocedure questionnaire. Cecal intubation rates, duration of procedure, sedative, and analgesic use, and patient reported procedural pain scores were equivalent among the groups. The GI-NP group had a higher adenoma detection rate compared with the combined GI-MD groups (42% and 17%, respectively, p = .0001) and a higher satisfaction score when compared with the combined GI-MD groups (mean 5.9 ± 13.81 and 8.6 ± 16.11, respectively, p = .042; visual analog scale 0-100 mm, "0" = completely satisfied, "100" = completely dissatisfied). There were no immediate complications reported in any group. The properly trained GI-NP in our study performed screening colonoscopy as safely, accurately, and satisfactorily as the GI-MDs. Using well-trained NPs for screening colonoscopy can be an effective strategy to increase access to colorectal screening.

Opening doors for nonphysician colonoscopists.

The current need for colonoscopies is high and steadily growing. Many healthcare facilities are finding that there is a shortage of specialized physicians to perform this procedure. By training nonphysician providers who have previously screened for colorectal cancer and performed colonoscopies safely and accurately, this shortage can be eliminated.